Phone: 1300 239 038; Cell +61 (0)414 753 383 ; skype://skeeve
Hi David,Also, correct me if I'm mistaken, but by raising the default from /32 to /29, you are raising the barrier to entry for small LIRs. I believe APNIC's fees are based on your allocation size. Yes, its a logarithmic function, but it still raises the fees. So a small LIR that doesn't currently need a /29 may prefer to stick with a /32 for the lower fees. This policy seems to force all new allocations to /29, regardless of what an LIR needs or wants. Minimally, this change should be optional, allowing an LIR request range a larger range, but not requiring a larger range.
IMO The whole idea of this prop is to remove the justification barrier to get more address space during initial allocation or at subsequent allocation level. No change in minimum initial allocation (/32 for LIRs and /48 for end-sites) has been proposed (or atleast I don't see it). So any who doesn't agree with the positives of /29 which came out during the discussion here doesn't have to pay higher amount.. APNIC fee for /32 is AUD 1,994 and for /29 it is AUD 4,381 (provided that you don't have more then /22 IPv4)Proposed Changes (as requested in prop):Organizations that meet the initial allocation criteria are eligible to receive an initial allocation of /32. For allocations up to /29 no additional documentation is necessary.And for existing membersLIRs that hold one or more IPv6 allocations are able to request extension of each of these allocations up to a /29 without meeting the utilization rate for subsequent allocation and providing further documentation.
* sig-policy: APNIC SIG on resource management policy *
sig-policy mailing list
sig-policy at lists dot apnic dot net