past vs future use

[Kim Hubbard]

>
Jeff,

The section of the RFC you are quoting is for end-user assignments, not
ISP allocations.  ISPs requesting address space from the InterNIC must
show they've efficiently utilized a /19 already in order to justify receiving
a /19 or shorter prefix which is the longest prefix that is currently
globally routable.

One of the first things we would like to accomplish with ARIN is to update
the allocation policies in coordination with its members.  If you have any
suggestions please send them to the pagan mailing list...pagan at apnic.net.

Kim

> Jon and all,
> 
> Jon Lewis wrote:
> > 
> > On Thu, 26 Jun 1997, Justin W. Newton wrote:
> > 
> > > 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
> > 
> > That's not the impression I get from rfc2050.
> > 
> > [direct quote from the rfc]
> > ---
> > 3.1  Common Registry Requirements
> > 
> >    Because the number of available IP addresses on the Internet is
> >    limited, the utilization rate of address space will be a key factor
> >    in network number assignment.  Therefore, in the best interest of the
> >    Internet as a whole, specific guidelines have been created to govern
> >    the assignment of addresses based on utilization rates.
> > 
> >    Although topological issues may make exceptions necessary, the basic
> >    criteria that should be met to receive network numbers are listed
> >    below:
> > 
> >                 25% immediate utilization rate
> >                 50% utilization  rate within 1 year
> > 
> > ---
> > 
> > Based on this, I would think an ISP that is, or is about to be, multihomed
> > and is currently completley (and efficiently) using at least a /21 worth
> > of IP's and expects to fully utilize a /20 in about 1 year _should_ be
> > able to apply for and receive their very own /19.
> 
>   I have to agree with Jon's assesment here.  It would seeme exactly
> so that if an ISP is multihomed and completley using at least a
> /21 worth of IP's and is expecting to use a /20 in about a year
> should have no problem with justifying and being granted their very
> own /19.  I would make a small proviso here, that being that as to
> what is consittuted as "Efficiently Using".  This may have several
> interpratations. so I would leave this part out, for the perposes
> of definition.  SOme guidelines need to be clarified on this point
> IMHO.
> > 
> > ------------------------------------------------------------------
> >  Jon Lewis <jlewis at fdt.net>  |  Unsolicited commercial e-mail will
> >  Network Administrator       |  be proof-read for $199/message.
> >  Florida Digital Turnpike    |
> > ________Finger jlewis at inorganic5.fdt.net for PGP public key_______
> 
> Regards,
> -- 
> Jeffrey A. Williams
> DIR. Internet Network Eng/SR. Java Development Eng.
> Information Eng. Group. IEG. INC. 
> Phone :913-294-2375 (v-office)
> E-Mail jwkckid1 at ix.netcom.com
>