Policy Statement on Address Space Allocations
smd at cesium.clock.org
Fri Jan 26 19:22:34 UTC 1996
| > We just have some differences of philosophy -- you think
| > that RIPE really can persuade people into having only
| > 1024 announements (preferably far fewer) in 195/8, and
| > I don't. That's all.
| OK. I call this a challenge but you won't let me try ;-).
You and Randy Bush seem to be reading each other's minds.
He has proposed this in a way that is very interesting,
and which I will think about.
There is a bad failure mode to consider that even a badge
afterwards won't make any more attractive.
Mostly it's "what on earth do we do if we cross the
threshold of 1024 prefixes in 195/8?" to which I see no easy
answer that doesn't involve inflict enormous pain on people
with old, established long prefixes in 195/8.
If you could help more there, then yes, you can think of it
as a big challenge. The rest of your message is a good
start, and has me thinking, as I've just told Randy in
The only other detail is that the consequences of making an
exception in one piece of unallocated-from address-space
because of the involvement of a single particular
organization may have some side-effects beyond engineering
that will have to be pondered by some other of my colleagues.
This is also something you could help think about, as we
will need an answer for "well, you gave *RIPE* a break, why
More information about the NANOG