Andrew,
On Mar 15, 2007, at 5:26 PM, Andrew Alston wrote:
[...]
b.) The idea of a /44 boundary levels the playing field, everyone is
entitled to the same initial, everyone is entitled to grow, let's
not allow
some who know how to work the system to end up with more than those
that
don't, because I see this as a real danger unless there are fixed
policies.
(look at the situation with v4 at the moment, and while I won't go
into what
I mean by working the system, a little analysis and some thought
should
clear up what I mean)
I think the fairness argument is very important. However, I am not
sure I understand what take-up you expect for the reserved space and
that means I can't work out what proportion of the space you'd like
reserved is ever likely to be used. What proportion is likely to be
wastage?
One /48 gives an end-site -- not an ISP which would qualify for a /32
anyway -- 65536 /64 networks. The majority of those assignments will
need to be used before the end-site needs to expand its prefix from
a /48 to a /47. What I really don't have a feel for is how many
organisations are likely to grow out of a /48 at a single site. I can
easily understand a single organisation wanting a separate /48 for
separate sites in separate cities or countries - but how many are
going to require that level of growth in single locations? Further,
how many sites are really likely to grow 16-fold at a single location?
I think it's worth looking at the likely take-up of the reserved
spacve before hardening the policy.
Regards,
--
Leo Vegoda
IANA Numbers Liaison
_______________________________________________
rpd mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.afrinic.net/mailman/listinfo.cgi/rpd
