[members-discuss] [address-policy-wg] RIPE NCC Charging Scheme 2016 Discussion
- Previous message (by thread): [members-discuss] [address-policy-wg] RIPE NCC Charging Scheme 2016 Discussion
- Next message (by thread): [members-discuss] [address-policy-wg] RIPE NCC Charging Scheme 2016 Discussion
Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
Sascha Luck [ml]
ripe-md at c4inet.net
Mon Jan 26 12:48:41 CET 2015
On Sun, Jan 25, 2015 at 10:08:27PM +0000, Nick Hilliard wrote: >Today's figures from delegated-ripencc-latest and the ripedb show: > > - 26768 ASNs assigned > - 7165 LIRs with ASNs > - 6245 with a single ASN assigned > - 649 with 2 ASNs > >Looking at these numbers, even if a quota figure were set as low as 2 ASNs >per LIR, that's still over 25% of all ASNs for which there is no reason to >return if they're unused. This is not going to encourage >efficient garbage collection. Erm. 25% of all *currently assigned* ASNs, whatever that may signify. 2ASN/LIR is ~0.0007% of *all* ASNs (assuming 9k LIRs) >As a separate issue, free asn quotas for LIRs are not really >within the spirit of RIPE community policy for PI resource >assignment. Currently all ASN are "free", so how does this proposal make it worse? rgds, Sascha Luck
- Previous message (by thread): [members-discuss] [address-policy-wg] RIPE NCC Charging Scheme 2016 Discussion
- Next message (by thread): [members-discuss] [address-policy-wg] RIPE NCC Charging Scheme 2016 Discussion
Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]