Search RPD Archives
Limit search to: Subject & Body Subject Author
Sort by:

[policy-wg] Policy proposal: IPv4 allocation to End Users

McTim dogwallah at
Fri Apr 29 20:59:04 UTC 2005


Apologies for multiple posts coming up, but I would like to make a
point or two about each of your mails.

On 4/25/05, Gregory Massel <gregm at> wrote:
> /24 ?
> This seems to be a bit out of line with the other RIRs and given the current
> exponential growth of the global routing table, may need reconsideration.

A route is a route, whether it is /30, /24 or /14, it's still one route.

> The proposed policy doesn't make it clear if this applies only to critical
> infrastructure or if that is simply one example.

It is clear to me that it applies to any and all.

> > b) Justification of an immediate need of at less 50% of total requested
> > size based on its Network Infrastructure. Eg: new Company.

I think the above should read "at least 50%..." just a typo?


nic-hdl:      TMCG

More information about the RPD mailing list