[address-policy-wg] Proposal 2010-02

On 28 Oct 2010, at 00:37, Hannigan, Martin wrote:

> Allocating each LIR exactly the same sized prefix regardless of _need_ is
> pretty unfair sll considered. The addresses could be utilized more
> efficiently addressing qualified need instead.

	As I read the proposal, the allocation of a single prefix
	of the same size to each LIR is not at all regardless of need,
	but prioritizes a different need -- that of access to the
	post-depletion market -- over the pre-depletion need to obtain
	address allocations for assignment to customers.

	IIUC, the idea here is that the growing Internet will be IPv6-only;
	that 6to4 gateways or other continuity measures will be required;
	that the opportunity for new market entrants to run their own
	continuity infrastructure should be protected; and that a single,
	small allocation per LIR will afford this protection.

	That seems pretty _fair_ to me, in the circumstances.

	ATB
	Niall