I support those changes. Arguments are the same as Cathy gives. WBR, Dmitry Menzulskiy DM3740-RIPE ----- Переслано: Dmitriy V Menzulskiy/BeeLine дата: 19.10.2006 18:30 ----- address-policy-wg-admin@ripe.net написано 19.10.2006 15:26:57:

I support changing the assignment window to a /21 or even something larger. When I worked for a company that was a RIPE LIR I found that the small AW made it very difficult to do my job. I feel it's more appropriate to give LIRs information about how to make wise and documented assignments to customers and then assume they're adults and that they will do the right thing. If they fail in this then make it harder for them to get a subsequent allocation. Making them ask permission for every customer assignment is just a pain.

Thanks! ---Cathy

On 10/18/06, Filiz Yilmaz < filiz@ripe.net> wrote: PDP Number: 2006-07 Minimum IPv4 Assignment Window

Dear Colleagues

The Discussion Period for the the proposal 2006-07 has been extended until 29 November 2006.

This proposal suggests the minimum Assignment Window (AW) available to LIRs should be raised from zero (0) to /21 (2048 IPv4 addresses). Because the sub-allocation policy references the AW policy, the sub-allocation policy also needs to be updated. This proposal suggests that the maximum sub-allocation should be kept at /20 (4096 IPv4 addresses).

You can find the full proposal at:

http://www.ripe.net/ripe/policies/proposals/2006-07.html

We encourage you to review this policy proposal and send your comments to <address-policy-wg@ripe.net>.

Regards

Filiz Yilmaz RIPE NCC Policy Development Officer