[ppml] Incentive to legacy address holders

[Scott Leibrand]

Leo Vegoda wrote:
> On 12 Jul 2007, at 14:10, Scott Leibrand wrote:
>
>> Some splitting is the result of RIR allocation practices, but that 
>> may not be apparent just from looking at the announcements.  For 
>> example, ARIN gives us about a /17 at a time, and we have to split 
>> that up and allocate it, usually as /20's, to our various ASNs.  If 
>> we didn't have to do the IPv4 justification thing, we could have a 
>> single aggregate (/16 or so) for each ASN.  In IPv6, we'll be able to 
>> split our /32 up into one subnet per ASN.
>
> It sounds like you're using the word "practices" as a synonym for 
> "policy". Presumably ARIN only allocate /17s if that's what you need 
> for the next six months because that's the policy (4.2.4.4) the 
> community gave them.

Yes, I would say that all RIR allocation practices of this type are 
dictated by policy (and there's a good reason for doing it that way).  
My only point is that this particular type of deaggregation should get 
better in IPv6, so we can expect fewer routes in the IPv6 table as a result.

-Scott