Re: /27 the new /24

[Justin Parker <parkerj17 () gmail com>]

You guys really don't need to argue on list. There are a lot of people
subscribed here and I don't feel as if anything constructive is being
accomplished.
On Oct 2, 2015 4:07 PM, "Justin M. Streiner" <streiner () cluebyfour org>
wrote:

> On Fri, 2 Oct 2015, Niels Bakker wrote:
>
> * tom () ninjabadger net (Tom Hill) [Fri 02 Oct 2015, 18:34 CEST]:
> > > Any RIR - or LIR - that considers allocating space in sizes smaller than
> > > a /24 (for the purpose of announcing to the DFZ) would do well to read this
> > > report from RIPE Labs:
> > >
> > >
> > > https://labs.ripe.net/Members/emileaben/has-the-routability-of-longer-than-24-prefixes-changed
> > >
> > > tl;dr: it's still a bad idea to allocate smaller than a /24.
> >
> > RIPE has long allocated up to /29.  Not everybody needs addresses for the
> > Internet; some just need a guarantee of global uniqueness.
>
> Right, but the OP's question seems to be pointed much more toward global
> reachability, not just global uniqueness.
>
> jms