[address-policy-wg] RE: 2010-01 New Policy Proposal (Temporary Internet Number Assignment Policies)

On 06/05/2010 00:32, Jamie Stallwood wrote:
> Today's discussion was interesting and concern was raised about
> commercials being able to get all or most of the address space set aside
> in the proposal, and about unfair commercial advantage. My thoughts as a
> paragraph, which I know is rushed and woolly and only intended as a
> discussion point:
> 
> 3.5 Use by Commercial Organizations
> Temporary address space will not be assigned by the RIPE NCC to any
> commercial organization where such an allocation:
> * Is not shown to be for a research, development or testing project
> relevant to an operational business of that organization
> * Does not seek to provide a "benefit", e.g. through published work in
> academic or industrial journals, or
> * Is unable to demonstrate a fair inclusion policy for other commercial
> organizations to contribute to, or benefit from, the project.

The original point about unfair advantage was purely that any organisation
(whether commercial or not) could hog all the address space in a temporary
assignment pool managed by the NCC, and that this would discriminate
against all other potential end users.

In the case of commercial end users, this discrimination could be
interpreted as a commercial advantage / disadvantage situation.

Can you explain why you're suggesting that commercial end users be
discriminated against in any future temporary assignment policy?

Nick