Re: standards for giving out blocks of IP addresses

[Charles Scott <cscott () gaslightmedia com>]

On Sat, 16 Jun 2001, David R Huberman wrote:

> You are not really justified to assign more address space to them until
> they have assigned 80% of their /20. (There are real-world examples where
> orgs need to request additional address space at the same time as
> achieving 80%, but let's not let reality get in the way of textbook
> examples!)
>
> The size of the additional block you assign them should closely fit the
> 25%-50% requirement. (Again, real world examples tend to trend to fitting
> the 50% requirement more than the 25% requirement, but so be it.)

David:
    I think my prior response answers most of this, but it should be clear
that the 25%-50% "suggestion" can't be compatible with the 80%
requirement. These must be refering to two totally different things,
particlulary because the 50% referes to a year, and RFC2050 suggests 3
month worth of IP address for subsequent allocations. 

Chuck