On Sun, 13 Apr 2003 jlewis@lewis.org wrote:
On Sun, 13 Apr 2003, Stephen Sprunk wrote:
Please explain how somebody with more than 4096 hosts in PA space is supposed to renumber into a /20 of PI space.
I fear you propose that he move the first 3276.8 hosts, request a second block, move another 3276.8 hosts, request a third block, etc. until he's got a dozen new allocations which can't be aggregated. Perhaps this explains the explosive growth in the routing tables since ARIN took over.
Perhaps the poster who mentioned they didn't get enough space to renumber should have started, filled the allocation, requested another, and finished the renumbering. In your request, did you mention any sort of projected timeline for renumbering into the block you requested?
Maybe someone should write an update for rfc2050. Depending on which IP analyst your request is handled by, rfc2050 may be invoked, which states:
Additional address allocations will provide enough address space to enable the ISP to assign addresses for three months without requesting additional address space from its parent registry. Please note that projected customer base has little impact on the address allocations made by the parent registries.
I don't know anyone who's actually followed this, but I haven't communicated with many ARIN members about this sort of thing lately. Is this policy being enforced consistently now? I know in the past, ARIN has had their own policies (at least for initial and at one time for second allocations) that pretty much ignored this. Once upon a time, you could request a /20 from a reserved /19 as long as you were multi-homed and could justify a /21. Fill the first /20 in 18 months or less, and you get the other half, and have a /19. I think the rationale for this at the time was routing filters, as you were allowed to announce the /19 even before the second half of it was officially yours. Now, the ARIN tune seems to be "we only assign numbers, routability is your problem".
I don't claim to have an easy solution for this. If every idiot with a business plan could request and receive a /16, there'd be an awful lot of wasted space. But if you've been around for most of the past decade and have continued to grow, should you really be issued new non-agregable blocks every several months?
Somebody must have a better idea.
the way the registries handle it is better than rfc2050 tho surely? i mean they are encouraging folks to announce fewer routes by exceeding their requirement and its the routing table size we're more concerned about i thought the panic about wasted space had passed since people noticed we're only using a small chunk of the available space (post cidr) Steve