On 11-Feb-99 Paul Tate wrote:
Stephen Burley <stephenb@uk.uu.net> writes: * Can I make a suggestion: * * We leave the maximum as a /19 and for a period of time lower the registries * assignment window to a reasonable level i.e. a /22 or /23 which will give ea * ch * registry the time to prove their procedures and expose them to RIPE policies * again. This could be done on a rotational basis so each registry could prove * to * RIPE that they have good working practice. Once RIPE was happy with the * registry they would raise the assignment window to the original size. This * could be done on a 2 year basis. So within a 2 year period RIPE would be hap * py * that any given registry is applying RIPE policy and DB correctly. Of course * this would not need to be done to registries who RIPE are already in regular * contact with.
I think the above comments defeat the purpose of the suggestion to cap the size of a maximum assignment window to, say a /21. I cannot imagine the increase in workload on registries like yourself who have a /19 aw to be all that great. Customers requesting a /20 and /19 worth of address space must be in a minority and besides a turnaround time of three days for such requests is pretty reasonable.
Not really. This not an academic arena, people are paying for the best service they can get and want their connection tomorrow i am not joking. This reminds me of the UK name space requests which had a 3 to 5 day turn around which was unacceptable so nominet was created and took over the UK name space, we now have instant registration. Just an example of why 3 days is not an acceptable delay in installation time i think your comment was a little naive. Your comments about monitoring registries on a two year
basis would, I feel, seriously increase the burden on us here at RIPE NCC. I think you should also bear in mind that the suggestion to lower the maximum aw is also an attempt to make the playing field more even so to say.
I disagree, the lowering of the largers registries aw to a lower size will probably generate just as much work for ripe. Also if you only apply this to the largest aw's then what about the registries with aw of less than /21, they could be making as many mistakes and not applying policies, all registries must be equaly treated. By rotating the lowering as in Paula's last email then all registries are checked for policy compliance.
Paul Tate Hostmaster RIPE NCC
---------------------------------- Stephen Burley Senior Hostmaster for UUNET Date: 12-Feb-99 Time: 08:50:07 http://www.uk.uu.net ---------------------------------- An MCI WorldCom Company