Re: [address-policy-wg] new policy idea for PA allocations

[Shane Kerr shane@localhost]

Remco,

On Thu, Aug 07, 2008 at 11:03:56PM +0200, Remco van Mook wrote:
> So, a LIR that comes back immediately is clearly up to something
> fishy or might not be completely truthful in filling out their
> templates .

Good point!

> I'm not convinced we can't work out a way to give this a proper
> write-up, but currently I just want to see whether the general idea
> has merit according to the community. So, does it ?

I think it is relatively simple and has merit; the potential benefit
is not very large, but it is almost free.

The main problem is people who only see the pain it will cause them
when addresses run out.

But, if you need a /16 and there is only a /17, and two /18 blocks
left, then you are going to be screwed in a few months when you come
back and there are only a handful of /24s lying around anyway.

Time to get that IPv6 plan rolled out? (More likely time to set up a
monster NAT box and give your users RFC 1918 addresses.) :(

--
Shane