[arin-ppml] Policy Proposal 2008-4 - a consensus opinion?

Leo Vegoda leo.vegoda at icann.org
Mon Oct 13 15:44:02 EDT 2008

On 10/10/2008 7:08, "David Farmer" <farmer at umn.edu> wrote:


> Bill if you say so, then the magic number is /29, see the following looking at
> 193/8 and 194/7;
> https://www.ripe.net/ripe/docs/ripe-ncc-managed-address-space.html
> I've been digging in and looking at stuff, I didn't realize any RIR were or
> did
> allocate /29s.

It may be worth noting that people sometimes require unique address space to
number relatively private internetworks. I believe the concept was accepted
by ARIN in policy proposal 2004-3 (Global Addresses for Private Network
Inter-Connectivity). ARIN policy section 4.3.5 now states that "When
private, non-connected networks require interconnectivity and the private IP
address numbers are ineffective, globally unique addresses may be requested
and used to provide this interconnectivity."

If a /29 works in this sort of situation it seems reasonable to allow such
an assignment, rather than forcing a /24 on the network and wasting 248
addresses. You *might* see announcements for /29s but I expect that very few
of these small PI assignments are intended to be publicly routed.


Leo Vegoda

More information about the ARIN-PPML mailing list