| | | | | | | | |
|
|
|
You're here: Home |
Dear SIG members
Below is a summary of discussion on the proposal to date. We
encourage you to discuss this proposal on the mailing list before
APNIC 25.
Discussion statistics
---------------------
Posted to Policy SIG mailing list: 8 January 2008
Number of posts: 8
Number of people participating in discussions: 5
Economy of origin of participants: 4 from Australia
1 from Nepal
Summary of discussion to date
-----------------------------
- The new tier would be cheaper than the current lowest
membership tier.
- ISPs are not usually satisfied with a /24.
- The minimum allocation size in the AfriNIC region is a /22,
where ISPs are much smaller and have less income than Indian
ISPs.
- If an ISP does not use NATs, it could easily justify a /21.
- Allocating /24s could:
- Increase the routing table size
- Result in ISPs having to buy bigger route processing
systems sooner than they expected to cope with the
increasing quantity and frequency of BGP updates
- prompt global carriers to start filtering these small
allocations to protect their routers and backbone integrity
- The proposal will have an effect on NIRs. If APNIC adopts the
proposal, NIRs will need to consider implementing a/24
minimum allocation size too.
- How does an ISP with only a /24 of address space do traffic
engineering? Small ISPs who receive a /24 allocation under
this proposal would not be able to multihome effectively.
- Many ISPs are discussing filtering all /24s from their routing
tables.
- Perhaps a /22 or /23 minimum allocation size would be more
appropriate. It would:
- avoid route filtration
- provide for traffic engineering
- allow a financially restricted LIR to be classified as a
Very small member.
Full details of the proposal can be found at:
http://www.apnic.net/policy/proposals/prop-053-v001.html