I don't know about "any" size. We have a /28 which gives us 14 host numbers. We are currently using 12 of them for 6 JNOS systems and 6 Linux gateways. The last two will probably get used in the next few months. When we originally applied for the block, we had somewhat different intentions for the numbers. Since then, we've changed the design and yet we're still using all of the numbers. But it took us a couple of years to get to this point. The fact that the numbers are sequential is VERY convenient when doing day-to-day maintenance, looking at logs, etc. Trying to remember 14 addresses, or having to looking them up each time I'm trying to trace a conversation in a log would just be crazy. It also makes routing much simpler. Having 14 individual routes vs one /28 route would be a real pain. When you apply for a block from ARIN, you have to justify the size. It's reasonable to verify that a certain size is needed. For example, do you really need a /24? Or are you asking for that because you don't want to have to figure out the addresses. 44/8 has the room so I think we shouldn't be onerous about how to justify the block. But I do think "any" size, without a reasonable justification, is not a responsible way to go. Michael N6MEF -----Original Message----- From: 44net-bounces+n6mef=mefox.org(a)hamradio.ucsd.edu [mailto:44net-bounces+n6mef=mefox.org@hamradio.ucsd.edu] On Behalf Of Geoff Joy Sent: Sunday, June 23, 2013 8:23 AM To: eric.fort(a)gmail.com; AMPRNet working group Subject: Re: [44net] address block assignments for groups (Please trim inclusions from previous messages) _______________________________________________ There is no reason why any club or organization with a valid ham callsign should be denied a block of 44-net IP addresses of any size. I think I've assigned at least one club block and several ARES and RACES blocks over the years.

Ah. Sounds like we're on the same page. -----Original Message----- From: 44net-bounces+n6mef=mefox.org(a)hamradio.ucsd.edu [mailto:44net-bounces+n6mef=mefox.org@hamradio.ucsd.edu] On Behalf Of Geoff Joy Sent: Sunday, June 23, 2013 1:02 PM To: AMPRNet working group Subject: Re: [44net] address block assignments for groups I think you misconstrued my use of the word "any". Although I consider my 44.18/16 block to be very sparsely populated in proportion to its geographic area I wasn't advocating giving out /24s without some kind of justification. In the cases of San Bernardino city and county emergency response networks there was reason to believe a /24 was justified, assuming some kind of repeater network or specialized units to be distributed by the organizations. This gave the organization autonomous authority over their address space without having to come to me for every little change to their system. In the case of a club, I'd probably want to know how many active members they have and assign a /26 or /25 to allow for expansion. Following my subnets-down allocation scheme I can keep hosts contiguous within a subnet and if one outgrows its space, allocate the adjacent subnet and/or expand the mask to fit with minimal impact to routing tables. As it stands, Eric is in my area and we've worked together in the past so I thought he deserved a response from me. -- Geoff Joy - ke6qh - AmprNet IP Address Coordinator for San Bernardino & Riverside Counties. geoff(a)windomeister.com