Hello Francis and Jim, > We do not agree with this proposal. > > Sooner or later RIPE IPv4 address space will run out. Moving from /22 > to /24 will not change that, which is the essence of the question, but > doing so will create more fragmentation (BGP, smaller LIRS, cost > unfairness between members...). > > In practical terms, we believe this will also boost IP broker market > (the smaller the blocks, the stronger IP brokers will get). > > Current policy is a good compromise: it focus on allocating to LIRs > that assign and use address space ...until no more allocation can be > done.
It seems you misunderstand the proposal. This policy agrees with you that /22s should be allocated until RIPE NCC runs out. It is about what happens afterwards. We create a waiting list with either /22 or /24 allocation size. - Choosing /22 means that the waiting list is unmanageable and therefore (mostly) useless. - Choosing /24 means that the waiting list is manageable and a bit less useless. We're not suggesting to change the allocation size now, only for the waiting list. Cheers, Sander
