On Tue, Sep 30, 2014 at 7:12 PM, Bill Woodcock wrote:
>> - increase the reserve pool to a /15
>> - increase the minimum allocation for an IXP to a /22
>
> Quadrupling the allocation while doubling the pool halves the number of IXPs
> served, and I think it would be unfortunate and short-sighted t
A more rational threshold for that measurement would be 248 or even 240
participants.
Consider most IXPs have at least a couple of route servers (2 IPs) and likely
need some numbers for the physical infrastructure of the IXP. Additionally,
there are only 254 usable IP addresses in a /24, and ha
On 9/30/14, 18:12 , Bill Woodcock wrote:
- increase the reserve pool to a /15
- increase the minimum allocation for an IXP to a /22
Quadrupling the allocation while doubling the pool halves the number of IXPs
served, and I think it would be unfortunate and short-sighted to let that
happen.
.
On Tue, Sep 30, 2014 at 3:45 PM, Martin Hannigan wrote:
> Thanks.
>
> The discussion in the Open-IX community seems to support a CI change
> related to IXPs in the following manners:
>
> - use sparse allocations for CI space
>
> Helps to avoid renumbering of growing CI. We will use the suggestion
> - increase the reserve pool to a /15
> - increase the minimum allocation for an IXP to a /22
Quadrupling the allocation while doubling the pool halves the number of IXPs
served, and I think it would be unfortunate and short-sighted to let that
happen.
To inject some facts into the debate:
ht
Thanks.
The discussion in the Open-IX community seems to support a CI change
related to IXPs in the following manners:
- use sparse allocations for CI space
Helps to avoid renumbering of growing CI. We will use the suggestions
process for this.
- increase the reserve pool to a /15
Appears to b
On Sep 29, 2014, at 8:35 AM, Martin Hannigan wrote:
> In a discussion within the OIX standards community, there is support
> for asking ARIN to sparsely allocate micro allocation space for IXPs
> on /23. The only question is, how should we proceed? Ask ARIN directly
> or submit a policy? The form
In a discussion within the OIX standards community, there is support
for asking ARIN to sparsely allocate micro allocation space for IXPs
on /23. The only question is, how should we proceed? Ask ARIN directly
or submit a policy? The former would seem logical.
Best,
-M<
On Mon, Sep 29, 2014 a
On Sep 29, 2014, at 8:03 AM, Martin Hannigan wrote:
> Question for ARIN:
>
> Is whether Micro Allocation v4 address space sparsely allocated or not
> a policy or administrative question?
Presently, sparse allocation is not specified by policy, so it is an
administrative/implementation detail. I
Question for ARIN:
Is whether Micro Allocation v4 address space sparsely allocated or not
a policy or administrative question?
Best,
-M<
On Sun, Sep 28, 2014 at 11:52 AM, Seth Mattinen wrote:
> On 9/22/14, 10:56 AM, Andrew Dul wrote:
>>
>>
>> At the Chicago meeting there was some discussio
On 9/22/14, 10:56 AM, Andrew Dul wrote:
At the Chicago meeting there was some discussion around the
micro-allocation policy (section 4.4) of the NRPM. I committed to the
AC to produce a draft update to this section based upon feedback that I
heard from the community. Below you will find a draf
On Mon, Sep 22, 2014 at 10:56 AM, Andrew Dul wrote:
> Hello,
>
> At the Chicago meeting there was some discussion around the
> micro-allocation policy (section 4.4) of the NRPM. I committed to the AC
> to produce a draft update to this section based upon feedback that I heard
> from the communi
Andrew,
There was a discussion yesterday on the Open-IX standards list:
http://bit.ly/OIX-ARIN-20140926
Summarizing:
- Zero support for your proposed changes impacting IXPs.
Hope that helps.
Best,
-M<
On Fri, Sep 26, 2014 at 12:38 AM, Martin Hannigan wrote:
> If I were going to change
If I were going to change anything with micro allocations I would change:
- Make RIRs singular as in ARIN, not all of them.
- Remove the policy term and make it permanent
IXP growth has changed dramatically since the policy was written.
I'm not sure I understand the desire to change to a /26? W
> -Original Message-
> From: arin-ppml-boun...@arin.net [mailto:arin-ppml-boun...@arin.net] On
> Behalf Of Andrew Dul
> Sent: Monday, September 22, 2014 12:56
> To: arin-ppml@arin.net
> Subject: [arin-ppml] Micro-allocation policy proposal draft
>
> Hello,
>
g
>
> From: Andrew Dul [mailto:andrew@quark.net]
> Sent: Monday, September 22, 2014 11:22 AM
> To: David Huberman; arin-ppml@arin.net; Andrew Dul
> Subject: Re: [arin-ppml] Micro-allocation policy proposal draft
>
> David,
>
> If the last section was changed to...
, 2014 11:22 AM
To: David Huberman; arin-ppml@arin.net; Andrew Dul
Subject: Re: [arin-ppml] Micro-allocation policy proposal draft
David,
If the last section was changed to...
Other critical infrastructure such as core DNS service providers (e.g.
ICANN-sanctioned root and ccTLD operators) as well
ptember 22, 2014 11:05 AM
> *To:* arin-ppml@arin.net; Andrew Dul
> *Subject:* Re: [arin-ppml] Micro-allocation policy proposal draft
>
>
>
> This text concerns me:
>
>
> > Other critical infrastructure which is not defined in other
> sub-sections of section 4.4,
On 9/22/2014 11:05 AM, David Huberman wrote:
>
> This text concerns me:
>
>
> > Other critical infrastructure which is not defined in other
> sub-sections of section 4.4,
>
> > may receive allocations from ARIN, when operational need can be
> demonstrated.
>
>
> Can you please give us a real-worl
On 9/22/14, 11:05, David Huberman wrote:
This text concerns me:
> Other critical infrastructure which is not defined in other
sub-sections of section 4.4,
> may receive allocations from ARIN, when operational need can be
demonstrated.
Can you please give us a real-world example? The pre-
On 14-09-22 10:56 AM, Andrew Dul wrote:
These allocations will be no smaller than a /26.
Should you also indicate the 'max' covered by micro allocations?
--
"Catch the Magic of Linux..."
Michael Peddemors, President/CEO
[mailto:arin-ppml-boun...@arin.net] On Behalf
Of David Huberman
Sent: Monday, September 22, 2014 11:05 AM
To: arin-ppml@arin.net; Andrew Dul
Subject: Re: [arin-ppml] Micro-allocation policy proposal draft
This text concerns me:
> Other critical infrastructure which is not defined in other sub-secti
?This text concerns me:
> Other critical infrastructure which is not defined in other sub-sections of
> section 4.4,
> may receive allocations from ARIN, when operational need can be demonstrated.
Can you please give us a real-world example? The pre-defined list of critical
operators has ser
Hello,
At the Chicago meeting there was some discussion around the
micro-allocation policy (section 4.4) of the NRPM. I committed to the
AC to produce a draft update to this section based upon feedback that I
heard from the community. Below you will find a draft update.
This has not yet been su
24 matches
Mail list logo
