Should there be a limit of 1 of these assignments made per 'entity', with renumbering occurring if further address space is required ?
For clarification, the current proposal did not specify any limitation on the number of such assignments.
What would be the motivation for this?
I would say, to keep the tables from growing. Either have them renumber into another 'larger' space or allow them to grow into a larger space. micro allocations are a good thing (tm) if they are done right.
If so should we consider reserving the next larger block for a period of time, to account for possible growth ?
No reservations will be made. It is generally assumed that applicants will be paying a one-off service fee, rather than an ongoing membership based fee. This is in fact identical to the way that PI assignments can currently be obtained. The proposal restricts the assignments to (about to be) multihomed orgs.
ok, if this is the case, have them renumber to keep the number of announcements down.
Should 'small multi-homing' assignments be made from a specific (defined) netblock ?
I think there is a choice here. We can use "swamp" space, found mostly in 202/8 which by definition does not contain large ranges of address space, or we can take a range from the less "swampy" space ie. 218/8 and use that. My feeling is that it would be better to use the 202/8 range.
right. but what ever space is used, publish it so those of us that have filters can adjust for it. :)