Re: Is ripe allocating /24's?

[Jeremy Porter <jerry () freeside fc net>]

I don't think RIPE has change their /19 allocations to registries.
Hm... this from Ripe just last week:

Forwarded message:
> From dfk () ripe net  Wed Oct 14 06:28:45 1998
> Message-Id: <199810141024.MAA19658 () x46 ripe net>
> To: Regional IR Boards <gar-boards () ripe net>
> Subject: Initial Allocation Policy
> Cc: RIPE Local Internet Registries WG <lir-wg () ripe net>
> From: Daniel Karrenberg <Daniel.Karrenberg () ripe net>
> X-Organization: RIPE NCC
> X-Phone: +31 20 535 4444
> Date: Wed, 14 Oct 1998 12:24:34 +0200
> Sender: Daniel.Karrenberg () ripe net
>
>
>
> Background
> ----------
>
> The advisory council of ARIN asked ARIN to consider changing the current
> allcation policy.  The initial allocation to a new LIR/ISP should be
> reduced from a /19 to a /20.  The reason being that this would make it
> easier for new ARIN customers to receive an allocation directly from
> ARIN rather than from their up-stream provider.  According to ARIN's
> local allocation policy they would then need to justify the utilisation
> of only a /21 instead of a /20 previously allocated to them by their 
> upstream provider. 
>
> Another motivation is to improve conservation of address space by
> reducing the amount of unused addresses in initial allocations.
> The new policy would not increase the load on the global routing,
> because the same amount of allocations would still be given out, just
> one longer prefix. 
>
> Before deciding on this proposal ARIN has asked the other regional 
> registries (APNIC and RIPE NCC) to also consider this change.
>
>
> Considerations
> --------------
>
> Based on the RIPE NCC allocation data starting in 1992 we investigated
> how much impact the proposed change would have on the conservation of
> address space.  We determined how many LIRs in our service region had
> not used more than a /20 from their initial /19 allocation within one
> year.  The results are as follows:
>
> Of 1410 LIRs checked 304 (22%) had assigned not more than a /20 during
> the first 12 months of operations.  This means that 78% of the LIRs had
> used more than a /20 within one year.  The total amount of allocated but,
> after one year, not yet assigned address space was equivalent to 19 /16s.
> Some of the LIRs which did not have assigned more than a /20 after one
> year have since become inactive and the address space concerned will not
> be assigned in the foreseeable future.  However 272 of the 304 are still
> operational and it is likely that most of them will assign more address
> space in the future. 
>
> Further investigations showed that about 50% of those LIRs who haven't
> used more than a /20 appear to be multihomed. 
>
>
> Conclusions
> -----------
>
> These results have been presented to the LIR WG at the 31.  RIPE Meeting
> in Edinburgh.  The LIR WG is the body defining local address space
> policy for the RIPE NCC.  The LIR WG didn't feel that this is a reason
> to change the current allocation policy.  The benefits for conservation
> are not significant. 
>
> However, the consequences for aggregation are likely to be noticeable 
> if 80% of LIRs require a second allocation within a year.
> Furthermore the LIR WG expressed concerns about the routability of
> longer pefixes in the light of current prefix-length dependent filtering
> and flap dampening policies. 
>
> Under the current circumstances the LIR WG did not see a valid reason to
> change the current allocation policy. We ask the ARIN membership to
> take this into consideration and consider other ways of achieving 
> the aims of the proposed change.

---
To: Edvard Tuinder <ed () cistron net>
cc: nanog () merit edu
Fcc: sent
Subject: Re: Is ripe allocating /24's? 
In-reply-to: Your message of "Tue, 20 Oct 1998 11:00:42 +0200."
             <199810200900.LAA17926 () genius cistron net> 
--------

In message <199810200900.LAA17926 () genius cistron net>, Edvard Tuinder writes:
> On .nanog you wrote:
> > A provider has made the claim to me that RIPE is allocating /24's
> > addresses to various European providers.  Is this true?  What affect
> > does this have on providers with prefix-length filters?
> >
> > Or is this provider just mis-reading the RIPE allocation database.
>
> I think he is misreading the allocation database. The minimum allocation
> size used to be /19 and will become (or is) /20 to facilitate smaller
> providers. A /24 will not be allocated.
>
> What may be the case is that when you get *assigned* a /19, you're not
> allowed to use it without RIPE's knowledge. During your first own assignements
> ,
> you'll have to ask RIPE for approval. But that does _not_ imply that you're
> not allowed to announce the full block (which is even specifically noted
> in the doc's, it's just that you're not allowed ot _use_ (or re-assign)
> anything.
>
> -Ed
> -- 
> Edvard Tuinder
> Cistron Internet Services              Finger ed () cistron nl for PGP key

---
Jeremy Porter, Freeside Communications, Inc.      jerry () fc net
PO BOX 80315 Austin, Tx 78708  | 512-458-9810
http://www.fc.net
In message <199810200900.LAA17926 () genius cistron net>, Edvard Tuinder writes:
> On .nanog you wrote:
> > A provider has made the claim to me that RIPE is allocating /24's
> > addresses to various European providers.  Is this true?  What affect
> > does this have on providers with prefix-length filters?
> >
> > Or is this provider just mis-reading the RIPE allocation database.
>
> I think he is misreading the allocation database. The minimum allocation
> size used to be /19 and will become (or is) /20 to facilitate smaller
> providers. A /24 will not be allocated.
>
> What may be the case is that when you get *assigned* a /19, you're not
> allowed to use it without RIPE's knowledge. During your first own assignements
> ,
> you'll have to ask RIPE for approval. But that does _not_ imply that you're
> not allowed to announce the full block (which is even specifically noted
> in the doc's, it's just that you're not allowed ot _use_ (or re-assign)
> anything.
>
> -Ed
> -- 
> Edvard Tuinder
> Cistron Internet Services              Finger ed () cistron nl for PGP key

---
Jeremy Porter, Freeside Communications, Inc.      jerry () fc net
PO BOX 80315 Austin, Tx 78708  | 512-458-9810
http://www.fc.net