[rpd] AFRINIC Board ratifies Policy Proposal AFPUB-2016-V4-003-DRAFT03: IPv4 Resources transfer within the AFRINIC Region

[Lu Heng]

I think it’s unlikely that many routers would support anything below /24,
as the practice of not allowing split will lead to a decrease in supply in
small blocks (as large ones cannot be split), which undeniably increases
operation cost for small business.

On Fri, Jul 21, 2017 at 21:00 Mark Tinka <mark.tinka at seacom.mu> wrote:

>
>
> On 21/Jul/17 14:52, Mike Burns wrote:
>
> Hello,
>
> FYI, every other RIR allows partial block sales down to the minimum transfer size.
> This might mean a negative impact due to route de-aggregation, but it has a positive impact on the supply of addresses for the market, as address-holders can sell small sections of their holdings that might be unused, without the need for emptying the entire block.
>
>
> I think some text to cap the minimum transfer size to a /24 is still
> reasonable from a router FIB resource management perspective. I know it's
> not the RIR's job to be "operational", but given that IPv4's last legs
> could easily cost Internet infrastructure dearly, I think it's prudent.
>
>
> Mark.
> _______________________________________________
> RPD mailing list
> RPD at afrinic.net
> https://lists.afrinic.net/mailman/listinfo/rpd
>
-- 
--
Kind regards.
Lu
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://lists.afrinic.net/pipermail/rpd/attachments/20170721/502f2c25/attachment.html>