[ppml] Proposed Policy: Adding an HD ratio choice for new IPv4 allocations

[Charles Scott]

On Tue, 22 Feb 2005, Owen DeLong wrote:
>
> Further, if you have, in fact, issued /29s to the customers,
> then you have "utilized" for the ARIN term, 200 addresses
> per POP, not the 125 you claim.  200/256 is 0.78125, so,
> if you've done your entire network in this manner and you
> don't have any other small assignments in your POPs to take
> up the remaining (1 /29, 1 /28, 1 /27) prefixes aggregated
> to that POP (and for some reason, you can't put them elsewhere
> in your network as more specifics (?), then, I suppose that
> you might have some difficulty with the 80% rule.
> However, if you had 26 customers per POP, or, managed to
> find a need for that /27 (say the POP infrastructure), then,
> you'd have no problem with the current 80% rule.

Owen:
  I'm not sure about your comments above, It's been my understanding, that
address space assigned to an ISP's customers is considered 100% utilized
as far as the ISP's address reassignment pool is concerned--provided of
course that there was adequate justification for the assignment to the
customer (re: 25%/50% rule) in the first place. It's also been my
understanding that an ISP effectively assigns address space to itself from
their reassignment pool when it is to be the end user of the space and
that space needs to be justified under the 25%/50% rule. If there's no
argument about that, then there is a clear separation in the how the
justification is assessed for an ISP's reassignment pool vs end user
address space. Therefore my point on HD ratio not being necessary for
end-user utilization and not being relevant to a reassignment pool.

Chuck Scott
cscott at gaslightmedia.com