[1541] in North American Network Operators' Group
Re: Policy Statement on Address Space Allocations
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (Hank Nussbacher)
Fri Jan 26 01:41:42 1996
Date: Fri, 26 Jan 96 08:34:25 IST
From: Hank Nussbacher <HANK@taunivm.tau.ac.il>
To: Dennis Ferguson <dennis@Ipsilon.COM>, Yakov Rekhter <yakov@cisco.com>
cc: "Miguel A. Sanz. RedIRIS/CSIC" <miguel.sanz@rediris.es>, smd@sprint.net,
Daniel Karrenberg <Daniel.Karrenberg@ripe.net>, nanog@merit.edu,
forrestc@imach.com, cidrd@iepg.org, iab@isi.edu, iesg@isi.edu,
iana@isi.edu, Local Internet Registries in Europe <local-ir@ripe.net>
In-Reply-To: Message of Thu, 25 Jan 1996 16:49:48 -0800 from
<dennis@Ipsilon.COM>
On Thu, 25 Jan 1996 16:49:48 -0800 you said:
>We've got a basic conflict between "smaller" and "better", whose resolution
>will require (in the absense of really good renumbering technology)
>constraining our insistance on efficient address utilization by measuring
>the effect this has on routing tables. We need to get some quantitative
>goals assigned to this so we can measure what is "good" and "bad". I'd
>(again) suggest the following:
A /19 in Amsterdam makes sense as a maximum allocation. A /19 in Uganda
doesn't. I think due to different geographics we need to realize
that allocation policy has to be different depending on where you are.
Hank
