North American Network Operators Group Date Prev | Date Next | Date Index | Thread Index | Author Index | Historical Re: standards for giving out blocks of IP addresses
On Sat, 16 Jun 2001, David R Huberman wrote: > You are not really justified to assign more address space to them until > they have assigned 80% of their /20. (There are real-world examples where > orgs need to request additional address space at the same time as > achieving 80%, but let's not let reality get in the way of textbook > examples!) > > The size of the additional block you assign them should closely fit the > 25%-50% requirement. (Again, real world examples tend to trend to fitting > the 50% requirement more than the 25% requirement, but so be it.) David: I think my prior response answers most of this, but it should be clear that the 25%-50% "suggestion" can't be compatible with the 80% requirement. These must be refering to two totally different things, particlulary because the 50% referes to a year, and RFC2050 suggests 3 month worth of IP address for subsequent allocations. Chuck
|