[1540] in North American Network Operators' Group
Re: Policy Statement on Address Space Allocations
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (Robert A. Rosenberg)
Fri Jan 26 01:23:17 1996
Date: Fri, 26 Jan 1996 01:17:32 -0500
To: Daniel Karrenberg <Daniel.Karrenberg@ripe.net>
From: "Robert A. Rosenberg" <hal9001@panix.com>
Cc: Tony Li <tli@cisco.com>, forrestc@imach.com, postel@isi.edu,
nanog@merit.edu, cidrd@iepg.org, iepg@iepg.org, iab@isi.edu,
iesg@isi.edu, iana@isi.edu,
Local Internet Registries in Europe <local-ir@ripe.net>
At 11:47 1/25/96, Daniel Karrenberg wrote:
>1) The initial allocation for a newly established local registry (ISP)
>*always* is a /19. There will be no discussion about this.
>This is fixed, cast in stone, immutable, ... you get the idea. In
>particular it will not be influenced by marketing predictions, amount of
>capital available or the shoe size of the lawyers visiting our offices.
>(NB: The value of /19 might change at some point, but the fact that
>every newly established registry gets *the same size* initial allocation
>will not.)
When you allocate this /19, do you do so at such a boundary that it can be
converted to a shorter (/18-/17-/16-etc) prefix at a later date thus
avoiding the need to assign another block or forced renumbering (ie: "We
will give you a new /18 block and you have x months to return your old /19
[ie: They are given a 2nd /19 worth of numbers and they most move their old
/19 into the other half of the new /18]). If done correctly, you can
reclaim the over allocation of "reserved for expansion" blocks after
reaching the top of the original CIDR block and then doing the 2nd pass of
NEW assignments by halving the space between "phase 1" allocations (in
those segments where there has been no expansion of the /19 allocation into
a /18-etc).
