Criteria for initial PA Allocation

In message <20010522213112.H17832 at Space.Net>, Gert Doering writes:
>Hi,
>
>seems I got carried away :-)
>
>On Tue, May 22, 2001 at 05:37:40PM +0200, Hans Petter Holen wrote:
>> | Much more important than working out the details of what criteria qualify
>> | you for a /22 would be what criteria will cause RIPE to revoke the /22 it
>> | has assigned.
>> 
>> The proposal was that in order to qualify for a "standard /20 PA block"
>> you would need to
>> 
>> >- Demonstrated efficient utilisation of a /xx (/22?)
>> >Or
>> >- Immediate need for a /xx (/22?)
>> >
>> >- Agree to renumber (Required? Recommended?)
>> 
>> So the proposal is that in order to get a /20 you need to provide
>> documentation that you need some percentage of that adress space (25%).
>
>This is similar to the ARIN policy.
>
>I think it makes sense - if you are not able to fill a /22, your network
>is "smallish".  So using PA space and renumbering when changing ISPs is 
>not *that* hard, if done properly (DHCP, DNS, no hard-coded IP addresses 
>anywhere).

I know several companies who would be willing to renumber once per year
as long as they can be multihomed...

-- 
Poul-Henning Kamp       | UNIX since Zilog Zeus 3.20
phk at FreeBSD.ORG         | TCP/IP since RFC 956
FreeBSD committer       | BSD since 4.3-tahoe    
Never attribute to malice what can adequately be explained by incompetence.