[ppml] ppml 2002-7

[Craig A. Huegen]

On Tue, 11 Feb 2003, Alec H. Peterson wrote:

> But this is entirely the point behind the objections to allocating /24s
> again.
>
> We used to allocate /24s, and now we have a horrible mess of unaggregatable
> space (the swamp, 205/8 is pre-/19 space).  Current allocation policy has
> not stopped people from announcing /24s, but it at least allows people to
> aggregate to a certain degree and still be able to reach the entire
> Internet.

I don't think you can blame the prefix length for the problems in the dump
or swamp.  I think you can blame a number of other factors which are more
significant, like the lack of alignment to bit boundaries for aggregation,
the very loose (if at all) requirements for justification.

Counting on /24 vs. /20 to establish a bar to entry is a risky approach.
Leave it at /20 and you'll find people getting more space than they need,
creating waste of address space.

I think we might see more gains if we focus more heavily on the reclaim
side when an organization comes back for more.

/cah

-- 
Craig A. Huegen, Chief Network Architect      C i s c o  S y s t e m s
IT Transport, Network Technology & Design           ||        ||
Cisco Systems, Inc., 400 East Tasman Drive          ||        ||
San Jose, CA  95134, (408) 526-8104                ||||      ||||
email: chuegen at cisco.com       CCIE #2100      ..:||||||:..:||||||:..