[arin-ppml] ARIN-2023-8 - Reduce 4.1.8 Maximum Allocation

[Matt Erculiani]

David,

> You might want to look at RFC 7020, section 2.2.

I think the use of the phrase “permits aggregation” is key there.
Aggregation is a consideration, not a requirement. An example being don’t
satisfy someone asking for a /19 with 4x/21s when you could break up a /18
instead. The goal in RFC 7020-2.2 appears to be “don’t *unnecessarily*
contribute to increasing table size”, not “make table size a reason for
prohibiting very small allocations” which was really the point I was
refuting (perhaps too tersely).

Perhaps that was not the authors’ intent? I know for sure at least half of
them are here ;)

-Matt

Matt Erculiani


On Wed, Aug 14, 2024 at 18:09 David Conrad <drc at virtualized.org> wrote:

> On Aug 14, 2024, at 4:15 PM, Matt Erculiani <merculiani at gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > your announcement from wherever you are in the world consumes a slot in
> their routing tables
> The size of the Internet’s routing table isn’t an ARIN problem, nor should
> it influence number policy decisions. It’s a vendor and operator problem.
>
> You might want to look at RFC 7020, section 2.2.
>
> Regards,
> -drc
>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://lists.arin.net/pipermail/arin-ppml/attachments/20240814/26f76f39/attachment.htm>