Edvard Tuinder <ed@cistron.net> writes:
> I think he is misreading the allocation database. The minimum allocation
> size used to be /19 and will become (or is) /20 to facilitate smaller
> providers. A /24 will not be allocated.
This is not correct. There are currently no plans to reduce the minimum
allocation size from the current /19. To be precise about allocation
vs assignment I quote from ripe-159 below. See this document at
http://www.ripe.net/docs/ripe-159.html
for details.
Daniel
2.3. The Internet Registry System
The Internet Registry system has been established to
achieve the goals stated in Section 2.2. It con-
sists of hierarchically organized Internet Reg-
istries (IRs). Address space is typically assigned
to end users by Local IRs. The address space
assigned is taken from that allocated to the Local
IR by the Regional IR. End users are those organi-
zations operating networks in which the address
space is used. ...
Local IRs are typically
operated by Internet Service Providers (ISPs).
Local IRs hold allocations of address space for
assignment to end users. Assigned address space is
actually used to operate networks, whereas allocated
address space is held by IRs for future assignments
to end users. To achieve both the conservation and
aggregation goals, only IRs can hold allocations of
address space.
...
4.1. The Slow Start Mechanism
To prevent allocating large blocks of address space
that won't be assigned, the RIPE NCC has introduced
the concept of a slow start for allocations. The
idea is to allocate address space to Local IRs at
the rate it will be assigned. The minimum size of an
individual address space allocation is /19 (8192
addresses), and the maximum size is /16 (65536
addresses). The size of an allocation to a particu-
lar Local IR is based solely on the rate that the IR
has assigned previously allocated address space to
end users.
The slow start mechanism implements a consistent and
fair policy for every Local IR with respect to allo-
cations. Although the mechanism is similar to the
assignment window mechanism described in Section
3.6, the policy it implements is different. The
size of further allocations depends exclusively on
the assignment rate of the Local IR concerned while
the assignment window depends on the proficiency of
the registry staff in evaluating requests and pro-
cessing assignments.
4.2. First Allocation
When a new Local IR starts up, it has no address
space allocated to it. The first allocation will be
made automatically by the RIPE NCC, generally upon
receipt of the first assignment request from the
Local IR. Because there is no information about the
rate at which a new IR will make address assign-
ments, the size of the first allocation is always a
/19 (8092 addresses).
Remember that the amount of space allocated does not
determine the size of assignments a Local IR can
make. As discussed at the end of Section 3, a new
Local IR must have every assignment approved by the
RIPE NCC until its assignment window is increased.
4.3. Further Allocations
A Local IR can obtain additional allocations as
required. A request should be submitted to the RIPE
NCC when the currently allocated address space is
nearly used up (about 90 percent), or if a single
assignment will require a larger set of addresses
than can be satisfied with the allocated address
space. To obtain a new allocation, a Local IR should
submit a request to the RIPE NCC which includes a
complete list of the assignments made from all of
their allocations. The RIPE NCC will check this
information, compare it with assignments registered
in the database and may request further information
(such as documentation of some of the assignments)
to determine the need for a new allocation. Addi-
tional address space will be allocated after the
information supplied with the request has been veri-
fied, and a new allocation has been deemed neces-
sary.
Unfortunately, there is a tradeoff between the
aggregation and conservation goals in making alloca-
tions. To further aggregation, the RIPE NCC aims to
allocate contiguous address ranges to a Local IR.
However, because conservation of address space must
also be taken into account, this is not always pos-
sible. A new allocation to a registry can therefore
not be expected to be contiguous with past alloca-
tions. While the RIPE NCC always aims to further the
aggregation goal, and therefore to allocate contigu-
ous space, the RIPE policy is that under no circum-
stances are multiple allocations made to the same
Local IR guaranteed to be contiguous and aggregat-
able with previous allocations.