Consulting the PCH IXP directory as Nick did earlier (as well as the Euro-IX one), I think it is also reasonable to say that allocating a /24 is ambitious for the overwhelming majority of cases. Only 64 of listed IXPs have equal to, or more than, 100 participants, out of 958 IXPs, or about 6.6%. In this light, perhaps the default allocation discussed in 6.1.4 should go down to a /25. Looking at the the other end, it's not clear to me as to why an applicant cannot get more than a /23, if there is strong evidence necessitating it. To throw some random numbers as an example, this could be by demonstrating 70%-80% use of their current pool and submitting projected and historical growth rate data. Lastly, 6.1.2 mentions that "other uses are forbidden". Policies looking to enforce certain conditions are only meaningful if there is a framework for: a) Monitoring policy violations with accompanying documentation describing frequency, methodology etc. b) Describing disciplinary actions Kind regards, Aris