On 1/9/12 5:23 PM, Nick Hilliard wrote:
maybe we need to disagree. I don't support the proposal as-is, but would support the proposal if it were to include minimal justification for /29 (based on the current default of /32).
Nick, hi. Ok, I hear what you are saying.
To recap, the reason I hold this view is:
- it is a minimal change which requires virtually no overhead by the LIR, but will get them to think about whether they really need the space or not.
I think the price difference in LIR membership will probably make them think - more resources, bigger LIR ;)
- many LIRs will never need to use 6rd or any other transition technology, so assigning an extra 3 bits of address space is wasteful
- For the sort of LIR which doesn't require a transition technology like this, /32 is probably a lot more than the LIR will ever need anyway.
- RIPE and the RIPE NCC have a duty of good stewardship to the resources which they maintain. Increasing the amount of space allocated to LIRS by a factor of 8 without any justification whatever is (imo) bad stewardship of resources.
Let's see what others think - WG, any thoughts? Cheers, Jan