Sean Doran <smd@icp.net> writes: Slow-start is a good idea, and we have the RIPE /19 legacy to prove it.
It is not legacy. We are using it in 193/8 and 194/8 and currently we do not intend to do differently in any new /8 we might start. /18 is just too much of an allocation for a garage with a couple of <your favourite modem hub>. We cannot and will not refuse to allocate address space to such garages until someone comes up with a *resonable* policy of what is an eligible garage. I can understand that some sugest that a reasonable policy is to require connections to a at least two <major transit provider>, but I postulate that <major transit provider> can never be defined in a rasonable way. So please define which garages shall be eligible for an allocation and get the RIPE community to agree. Mind this is easier than the Internet community. Folks: Here is an issue!!!!
Now we need to look at whether this can be done with /18s without exhausting IPv4 too soon, as there are some real concerns about doubling the maximum number of prefixes many routers will see.
My experience tells me that it is too big. We are not doing slow start long enough however to quantify that.
| So how about agreeing on pools of address space for small allocations? I think you found a good topic!
Check out ripe-127. Daniel