Hi, On Mon, Jan 17, 2005 at 03:25:21PM +0100, Vincent Gillet wrote:
I am ok this the size /whatever.
My concern is the difference about /18 allocation from IANA versus /19 allocation to LIR
thus a 50% immediate usage.
As I've mentioned before (maybe overly cryptic) this is an area of ongoing concern - and the goal is to distribute address space from ICANN to the RIRs in "reasonable" chunks, for example a /12 or /8. There are some proposals out in all the regions, the majority of the constituency in all regions seems to be in favour of it (with small regional changes that are not incompatible to other regions), and we're waiting to see it implemented. The fact that the current allocation strategy is less-than-perfect (to be polite, for once) is mostly ICANNs fault, for clinging to a now-deprecated RFC and being very passive about abouting the processes. Bluntly: there are some people that cannot count, and assume that "IPv6 will run out tomorrow" if reasonable sizes are distributed. The arguments are always very similar ("classful addressing has failed in the past!" "people also said that 640 kbytes are enough!" and other "I don't want to think about large numbers but I oppose this!"- Arguments). Much more details about this can be found in the archives of the IPv6 WG and the address-policy WG (on http://www.ripe.net/) Gert Doering -- Address Policy WG Co-Chair -- Total number of prefixes smaller than registry allocations: 71007 (66629) SpaceNet AG Mail: netmaster@Space.Net Joseph-Dollinger-Bogen 14 Tel : +49-89-32356-0 80807 Muenchen Fax : +49-89-32356-299