Dear Daniel,
On 05/23/2011 03:10 PM, Sander Steffann wrote:
Current policy can be read by several ways. We're just playing with words - current policy doesn't force making single /22 allocations from other blocks than 185.0.0.0/8 (last /8) - it just says "if you have to allocate something from 185.0.0.0/8, you can do only do this and this..." in my eyes. Section 5.6 talks just about the last /8 and this is quite clear description. Last /8 is single address block. That is not what it says. The text is: "The following policies come into effect as soon as RIPE NCC is required to make allocations from the final /8 it receives from the IANA. From then on the distribution of IPv4 address space will only be done as follows:"
It says, 'the distribution of IPv4 address space' in general. Once the RIPE NCC has to allocate addresses from the last /8, then from that point in time the distribution "will only be done as follows", which is specified in the "1. Allocations for LIRs from the last /8" and "2. Unforeseen circumstances" sections. The text is pretty clear that I think.
Article name is: "Use of last /8 for PA Allocations" - that doesn't mean other /8... it's all only about last /8.
I am afraid the text of ripe-509 is very clear: "The following policies come into effect as soon as RIPE NCC is required to make allocations from the final /8 it receives from the IANA. From then on the distribution of IPv4 address space will only be done as follows:" This says two things: 1. These policies do not have to be applied as long as the RIPE NCC has other available addresses than the last /8 2. Once these policies have been triggered, there is no way back (see "From then on...").
And I don't see any argument, why tie RIPE NCC hands by applying this policy to other /8's. Current procedures can be used without any problem anytime - even in future on returned address space. If no addresses are available except last /8, allocations are simply proceeded in accordance to section 5.6, if there's some other address space available, standard procedure can be applied.
The current policies do not allow this. You may want to submit a new proposal. I personally do not think it would be wise to allocate returned addresses in accordance with policies applicable before the last /8, if we already started to allocate from the last /8 (i.e. I do not think it would be wise to have two sets of policies, both live at the same time, one applicable to the last /8 and an other one to the returned address space). For the record, I support the "Post-depletion IPv4 address recycling" policy. Best regards, Janos