past vs future use

[Justin W. Newton]

At 05:36 PM 6/26/97 -0400, Gordon Cook wrote:
>Can someone who is directly involved with the registry process clarify 
>what is going on here?

Kim would likely be the best person to answer this, but as she is at INET
'97 this week, I will give you my best guess as to their current
interpretation of policy. Please note that I have no current or past
relationship with ARIN, the Internic, RIPE or APNIC, aside from using the
services of the Internic, so anything I say is in no way authoritative of
anything.  (I am getting really tired of people insinuating that things I
say are when it is obvious that they couldn't possibly be.)  Oh yeah, one
more disclaimer, I am simply stating things as I see them, and am not
commenting one way or another as to whether or not I believe that this is
the way that things should be.

The current Internic allocation policy appears to be that you need to
utilize 32 Class C's worth of address space effectively before they will
assign you a /19 address block.  As it seems that a /19 is currently the
smallest allocation size that everyone that we know of will carry in their
routing tables, this seems to be the smallest size allocation that anyone
would ask for.



*********************************************************
Justin W. Newton                  voice: +1-415-482-2840 	
Senior Network Architect            fax: +1-415-482-2844
PRIORI NETWORKS, INC.              http://www.priori.net
Director At Large, ISP/C           http://www.ispc.org
"The People You Know.  The People You Trust."
*********************************************************