Skeeve Stevens wrote:

There are smaller hosting companies out there (here in ANZ at least) that want to be on, hosting, multi-homed, but only need a /24 or /23, but they’re given the minimum allocation on a /22 – whether they need it or not.

A /22 is the same routing effort as a /24. So given that most are unlikely to need much more than a /23 I don't think it'll make a difference to the routing table size.

In terms of using IPv4 up - given that I'm seeing ISPs with eyeballs being allocated large slabs of space (and I mean many multiples of /16s) the impact small hosting companies companies have as /22s or /24s is pretty trivial I'd expect.

Look at the CIDR reports - have a look at the aggregation possible with some ISPs - clearly a few /24s vs /22s makes little difference in a world where even a small bit of aggregation by the top 10 deagg people would reduce the routing table size quite a bit.

MMC