[ppml] Policy to help the little guys

On Wed, 19 Mar 2008, Randy Bush wrote:

> i was presuming the use of a well known /16 would be so that isps could
> allow the long prefixes in that space.  as it would be the same number
> of prefixes if we gave them /24s, what's the loss?
>
> btw, i remember an arin meeting in denver when cja tore my head off and
> bad mouthed me behind my back for proposing /24s.  so watch out!

Too many places likely have filters for longer than /24.  Trying to 
announce /29s, even with RIR blessing from a "special" /16 would likely be 
worse than getting the first allocation from 69/8.  I'm guessing a lot 
worse.

According to 
https://www.ripe.net/ripe/docs/ripe-ncc-managed-address-space.html
RIPE has 3 /8s worth of space in which the longest prefix given out is 
/29.  Are any of you accepting up to /29 in 193/8 and 194/7?

----------------------------------------------------------------------
  Jon Lewis                   |  I route
  Senior Network Engineer     |  therefore you are
  Atlantic Net                |
_________ http://www.lewis.org/~jlewis/pgp for PGP public key_________