[address-policy-wg] Vanity address allocations and the end of IPv4
Jim Reid jim at rfc1035.com
Mon Mar 29 16:24:18 CEST 2010
On 29 Mar 2010, at 14:48, Shane Kerr wrote: > To be clear, we're not talking about anyone getting more or less > address > space, or allocating in a way that makes aggregation more difficult. I > thought those were the two basic goals of IP allocation policy, right? I'm not sure Shane that an allocation of vanity addresses would fit with these goals. If it does, then fine. Though I'm doubtful. If there were "too many" vanity assignments, that may well fragment the unused space in a way that prevents another LIR getting a contiguous allocation that's big enough for their genuine technical needs. It might also encourage a land-grab by people gobbling up vanity space that they don't actually need in the hope that they could sell it on later.