: I'd like to see them start allocating recovered space from 192/8 in : /22 or maybe /21 sizes.
I asked for this and was treated like a complete idiot. There are a lot of small blocks in legacy space that I'd like to see some system for transferring between small guys who never used them and small guys who desperately need PI space for multihoming. Using DNS TTL fields is just ridiculous when there are much better technical solutions like, uh, BGP. A lot of people I know don't need /19s and don't want to waste the space (people have already mentioned this). Also, there is no incentive for returning IPv4 space if you know it'll just sit idle anyway.
The function of the InterNIC can be as an intermediary, verifying, as usual, that the requestor needs the space.
-Tung-Hui Hu hhui@arcfour.com
I am sorry that you felt treated like a "complete idiot". As there are still several registries that claim be be authoritative for 192/8, this is a tough block in which to start the piara experiment. It many ways, it still is like a toxic waste area... although with existant routing policy by ISPs its treated less like a toxic hazard and more like ambrosia, with one and all declareing this space to be special and above policy filtering constraints. Again, for more details on the history behind this discussion, pleae check the piara bof archives and old nanog notes. There are even some good tips on how to support multihoming w/o 192 space. In my humble opinion, its much better to clean up the whole range first and then re-release it as a clean /8, than haphazard redelgation. And yes, there is an incentive to return space. For some its the principle of the thing, a cooperative internet is a growing internet. For others it may be financial, with the expense of renewing lease delegations. (See the naipr/arin lists for more details). I hope this helps out some. I'd apprciate your comments. -- --bill