[arin-ppml] Rationale for /22

[Owen DeLong]

On Jul 30, 2009, at 3:46 PM, Leo Bicknell wrote:

> In a message written on Thu, Jul 30, 2009 at 05:48:06PM -0400,  
> William Herrin wrote:
>> If I may draw it back to the question I started with: Can you offer a
>> well grounded reason to believe that changing the minimum allocation
>> size for *multihomed* systems is likely to affect the size of the
>> global table?
>
> I believe it is reasonable to assume each decrease in prefix size
> allows more orgs to qualify, and thus increases the routing table.
> Now it may be we only add 1000 orgs, of which 800 previously were
> multi-homing with cutouts, so the net is 200 routes, but that doesn't
> mean it's not a decrease.
>
I don't get this...

Under current policy, any org that multihomes qualifies for a /24 from  
their
upstream.

Given that, any org that multihomes already qualifies to put a route  
in the
DFZ.

What increase are you concerned about that is added by moving the ARIN
boundary from /22 to /24?

Today, they can save $100/year and get space from an upstream that
they don't pay ARIN for, as well as getting a  /24 even if they want to
multihome a single host.  That's CURRENT ARIN policy.

If we move the boundary to /24, then, in addition to that option,  
networks
that have ~128 - ~400 hosts would gain the option of applying to ARIN
and getting a /24 or /23 to multihome with that was independent of
both of their providers.

Why would someone who is not willing to multihome for $100 less
pay $100 more to multihome _AND_ jump through more hoops just
because we changed the ARIN boundary?

Owen

>
>
> Personally I believe if an org can demonstrate it has multi-homed
> BGP connectivity (tunnels don't count, etc) they should probably
> be able to get a prefix from ARIN.  However, even with that belief I
> don't support any drastic moves in the prefix size, worried there is
> some tipping point out there where the balance changes radically.
>

Given we are at /22 and there are only 10 bits left... Please define
drastic in that context.  Is the 2 bits being discussed drastic?

Owen

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://lists.arin.net/pipermail/arin-ppml/attachments/20090730/67960c50/attachment.htm>