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

[Charles Scott]

On Tue, 22 Feb 2005, Owen DeLong wrote:

> 
> Only problem is that you are not correct about the 25/50% rule.  That only
> applies to the INITIAL allocation to an end-user organization and does
> NOT apply to additional assignments.  Additional assignments are still
> subject to the 80% of all existing space and 50% of most recent allocation
> rule.
> 
> Owen

Owen:
  Sorry, my perpetual confusion regarding what the meaning of
"utilization" is.
  This situation, however, indicates how inane the popular concept of
utilization (hosts/addresses) really is when applied universally to
everything from a single subnet to a large reassignment pool. I would
argue that this very narrow definition of utilization is only applicable
to the use of an individual subnet. At higher levels, it would seem that
if subnets are rationally and efficiently used, that they should be
considered consumed in their entirety for the purpose of evaluating the
pool from which they were drawn. If one takes that approach then there is
no more confusion, each level of assignment can be evaluated on it's own
merit, and there is no relevance to HD ratio. To do otherwise seems to be
the tail wagging the dog as each level in the hierarchy dynamically
complicates all levels above to point of absurdity.
  Having written the above, I would agree that in the absence of the above
logic, and where a strict composite hosts/addresses evaluation is used at
all levels, that an HD ratio bandaid could be argued--but not easily for
the reasons given.

Chuck