On 07.04 20:58, Remco van Mook wrote:
>
> Dear Daniel, dear all,
>
> First of all I support this proposal, and thank you for taking the time to
> create it. I think the idea has great merit, but I?m also reminded of an
> idea I sent out to the address policy mailing list and the feedback I got
> based on that. For that thread, see:
> http://www.ripe.net/ripe/maillists/archives/address-policy-wg/2008/msg00501.
> html . Just to refresh your memory, I proposed a policy that would only
> allocate a single block of space, regardless of the size of the request and
> available remaining inventory. One of the main shortcomings of my idea was
> that assignments from a new allocation don?t happen in a ?gradual? way,
> which is one of the main assumptions behind any scheme based on
> time-windows. Larger organizations will just come back quicker ? not
> necessarily after the set window. I?m afraid this proposal has the same
> ?weakness?.
>
> Kind regards,
>
> Remco
That can be so, but still the requests will be chopped up so that others
can get in the queue rather than being pre-empted by a huge request.
Daniel
This email is from Equinix Europe Limited or one of its associated/subsidiary companies. This email, and any files transmitted with it, contains information which is confidential, may be legally privileged and is solely for the use of the intended recipient. If you have received this email in error, please notify the sender and delete this email immediately. Equinix Europe Limited. Registered Office: Quadrant House, Floor 6,