[address-policy-wg] The final /8 policy proposals, part 3.2

> Agree for as long as there are addresses enough to meet the applicants
> needs. Yet it is IMHO pointless to hand out micro-blocks as a sorry
> response to a PA-request for a substantially larger block.

In particular, what if the applicant's competitor just received a much 
larger allocation two weeks earlier?

That's why I think that any policy change related to the last IPv4
allocations
should focus on some way to make sure that all LIRs run out of IPv4 at
roughly the same time.

Maybe the policy change needs to take effect before we reach the last
/8 from IANA. Maybe we need some kind of cap on maximum allocation that
shrinks month by month. Maybe we should link the allocation size to
the number of weeks it would take to use it up given the applicant's
historical run-rate, and then shrink that number of weeks every month.

> This isn't
> about forcing anyone in any particular direction, but about whether it
> is of greater benefit to the community at large to allocate 
> such blocks
> to organizations with a potential to enable connectivity between large
> numbers of new users and the existing v4 network.

Has anyone clearly explained how any organization would enable such
connectivity in a way that existing LIRs could not? It sounds like
people are assuming that there may be some magic bullet while in
reality there are just network providers providing services. The
technical
details of those services change over time for all LIRs. Innovation
is not restricted to new entrants.

--Michael Dillon