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

[rpd] Appeal against softlanding-bis declaration of consensus

Nishal Goburdhan nishal at
Thu Jan 11 12:33:32 UTC 2018

On 10 Jan 2018, at 21:38, ALAIN AINA wrote:

> Hello,

hi alain,
hny :-)

>> On 5 Jan 2018, at 10:05, Alan Barrett <alan.barrett at> 
>> wrote:
>>> On 4 Jan 2018, at 15:56, Ornella GANKPA <honest1989 at> 
>>> wrote:
>>> Anyone can always get more allocation as long as they justify 90%
>>> utilization.
>> That is accurate for the existing soft landing policy 
>> <>, 
>> but it is not accurate for the soft landing bis proposal 
>> <> 
>> (which recently ended last call and was sent to the Board for 
>> ratification, and which is the subject of an appeal).
>> Under the soft landing bis proposal, no organisation will be able to 
>> receive more than a /18 of IPv4 space every 24 months during 
>> “Exhaustion Phase 1”, or a /22 every 24 months during 
>> “Exhaustion Phase 2”, even if they can demonstrate 90% 
>> utilisation.
> Ornella presentation of the SL-BIS  is accurate.
> SL-BIS  set not limit on the number of requests a member can make 
> until they reach the maximum allowable size during each exhaustion 
> phase.

yes, but it does specify an upper limit on the total space that can be 
requested.   ie.  “totalling the equivalent of a /x “.  i admit that 
when i read this, i read it as an organisation not being able to get 
more than a /x within a period.  and it seems clear to me, that this is 
how it’s understood by many other people too.

so, to eschew obfuscation, could you clarify that please.

if you are saying that, an organisation can go back, and get more than 
that, then, this changes things quite a bit.  for a start, if i was able 
to get more than a /18, in a 2yr year period, then why have the 2yr 
period at all?


ps. i’m not stating the obvious; that i have satisfied the 
hostmaster’s concerns that my usage is legitimate.

More information about the RPD mailing list