Hi Kristofer, Kristofer Sigurdsson <kristofer@nh.is> writes:
Hi Leo,
leo vegoda, Fri, Feb 14, 2003 at 10:01:46AM +0100 :
[...]
With regards to request forms: the policy does not require LIRs to send requests to the RIPE NCC. Instead, the maximum sub-allocation size is linked to an LIR's Assignment Window.
According to the draft, the maximum size of a sub-allocation is 400% of a LIR's AW each year. Since our request is 1600% of our upstream LIR's AW, doesn't that mean they'll have to forward our request to RIPE, just like they have to do for our conventional assignment requests?
We won't be publishing request forms for LIRs wishing to sub-allocate more than 400% of their AW. We do not believe there is any reliable way for the RIPE NCC to evaluate such a request. This is because the request will, in most cases, be based on the predicted needs of predicted customers. Unlike assignments, no network plan justifying a request can be made. This is the main reason for delegating responsibility for sub- allocations to LIRs and basing it on their AW. Anyone needing a /20 could become an LIR and would receive it as long as they could demonstrate a need for efficient use of a /22 within the next three months. (Or existing use or a combination of the two). If you can suggest a reliable method of evaluating requests for a sub- allocation, and there is a demonstrated need for this, we would of course look at introducing a request form. Kind regards, -- leo vegoda RIPE NCC Registration Services