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 21:13:27 UTC 2005

Hi again,

On 4/26/05, Adiel A. Akplogan <adiel at> wrote:
> At 20:35 25/04/2005 +0200, you 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.
> No Gregory, all other RIR do assign /24 PI space to end-user.

or longer prefixes (193/8 has a minimum assignment size of /29 IIRC).

But /24 seems rational becasue the policy thoughtfully says:

"The requesting End users must

a)Show either an existing efficient utilization of at less /25 from
their upstream provider.

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

This encourages conservation by ensuring that much of the space will
be in use immediately.

> The routing issue is more about the upstream provider willing
> to announce it or not. 

ACK, announcing a more specific of an LIRs PA block isn't always
appreciated by the PA holder.

> And the PI space supporting document
> do WARN small PI space size requesters about the risk of not
> beeing able to make it routed by their upstream provider.

ACK, no space is guaranteed to be routable by any RIR, be it PI or PA.


nic-hdl:      TMCG

More information about the RPD mailing list