* Wolfgang Tremmel
> when opening a new exchange there are no customers connected yet, all you
> have is a business plan. So everything is kind of speculative and you can
> easily adjust your plan that you need a /24 - so why add additional workload
> to the NCC to review business plans?
Hi,
Using this rationale, why stop at /24? Why not give /23s by default - that is
the only way to ascertain that the NCC does not have to review business plans,
after all? I don't see how /24 is special in this context.
Also note that «stopping the NCC from reviewing business plans» is not a stated
objective of this policy proposal.
In any case, if the IXP manages to fill up its /x with members the policy
allows for replacing it with with a /x+1.
> An honest IXP operator can request something smaller if he knows that the
> exchange will not grow beyond a small number of customers within the first 5
> years or so.
You are implying that small IXPs that do not need more than /{27..25} are being
dishonest if they don't say so instead of taking the default /24 on offer.
Note that there is nothing in the proposed policy that requires or even
encourages them to do so, however. So why would they?
Tore
