j: Next unread message
k: Previous unread message
j a: Jump to all threads
j l: Jump to MailingList overview
Hi, there had been some additional comments on the JP mailing list. It's a little more specific than my previous comment, so I'd like to share them here.
+ The proposal is no longer valid as the original assumption (correlation between network size and the 80% problem) is broken
+ It is difficult for LIRs to judge an appropriate utilization. The criteria does not really matter as long as the upstream registry is flexible to LIR's situation.
Izumi on behalf of JP community
Kenny Huang wrote:
APNIC secretariat was tasked with the following action from APNIC 20. To refer further discussion of the policy proposal of applying HD ratio to IPv4 to the mailing list.
This email is sent on behalf of the Policy SIG chairs.
At APNIC 20, the APNIC secretariat presented findings from the LIR survey to help progress discussions of the policy proposal [prop-020- v001] "Application of HD ratio to IPv4"
The survey concluded that: -40% reported they had problems reaching 80% utilization -There is no strong correlation between 80% utilization problems and network size and complexity measured and based on -number of POPs -number of services deployed -number of levels of hierarchy
The LIR survey results slides and transcripts is available at http:// www.apnic.net/meetings/20/programme/sigs/policy.html
The history and status of the prop-020-v001 can be found at http:// www.apnic.net/docs/policy/proposals/prop-020-v001.html
The question to be answered by those on this list is :
"Do you support proposal [prop-020-v001] "Application of the HD ratio to IPv4" as a replacement for the current 80% measure of utilisation."
Please submit your opinions to this list, to assist us as chairs in deciding what to do with this proposal.
Kind regards, Kenny Huang Policy SIG chair
sig-policy: APNIC SIG on resource management policy *
sig-policy mailing list email@example.com http://mailman.apnic.net/mailman/listinfo/sig-policy