[address-policy-wg] 'Administrative ease' (was IPv6 allocations for 6RD)

> Current text:
> 
> 3.5. Conservation
> Although IPv6 provides an extremely large pool of address 
> space, address policies should avoid unnecessarily wasteful 
> practices.  
> Requests for address space should be supported by appropriate 
> documentation and stockpiling of unused addresses should be avoided.

Seems reasonable to me. It implies that giving someone a /21
based on their 6RD requirements is OK, but that they would have
to return the allocation once they no longer need the transitional
6RD service.

> Proposed new text:
> 
> 3.5. Conservation and Administrative Ease Although IPv6 
> provides an extremely large pool of address space, historical 
> evidence shows that what now seems infinit might one day turn 
> out to become a scarce resource, Address policies should 
> avoid unnecessarily wasteful practices of such resources. 
> Requests for address space should be supported by appropriate 
> documentation and stockpiling of unused addresses should be 
> avoided. Assignment of address space based on the sole 
> argument of administrative ease is not permitted. Examples of 
> this include, but are not limited to, ease of billing 
> administration and network management.

I disagree with this. If we are willing to accept that allocations
can be temporary, and should be returned when no longer needed,
then administrative ease is a good reason to justify a
larger allocation, particular when this supports transition
to native IPv6 networks. If a company needs a /21 to ease
the burden of transition, and will return it to RIPE in 5 to
10 years after native IPv6 is fully deployed in their network
then that seems reasonable to me. Any concerns that we have
with possible shortages of IPv6 address space are well
beyond the IPv6 transition, therefore 10 years should be
considered short-term.

--Michael Dillon