Kim,
what is the impact of allocations -vs- routing table space. a public
access route server reports the following:
64152 network entries and 253321 paths using 13815800 bytes of memory
another sez
69584 network entries and 704080 paths using 32026944 bytes of memory
while my numbers above may not be significant or representative of the
entire net, neither of the above support your conclusion that *today* we
need be seriously concerned with tight allocation policy based on the need
for route aggregation. memory is cheap now, so lets loosen those thumb
screws ;-)
regards,
-rick
On Tue, 7 Dec 1999, Kim Hubbard wrote:
>
> I wouldn't say that ARIN is stingy in how much address space it issues, we
> allocate whatever an organization (any organization) can justify but they
> must be able to justify at least a /20 (by whichever allocation/assignment
> policy applies to them) or they will be referred to their upstream ISP.
> This isn't done as much for conservation of address space as it is for
> aggregation of routing table space. We recently lowered our minimum
> allocation from a /19 to a /20 to allow more organizations to come directly
> to ARIN for address space and are monitoring the effect on the routing
> tables to see if we can continue lowering it in the future.
>
> Kim
>
