[connect-wg] Input request in regards of IPv4 dust for IXP Pool usage

Dear Connect-WG,

As we have been missing some of you during the RIPE77 Address Policy WG discussion, I would like to invite you to have a look in the archive of the Agenda topic of Andrea Cima of the RIPE NCC.

https://ripe77.ripe.net/archives/video/2232/   ( Andrea Cima - D. IPv4 End-Game and Afterlife )

As the collective of AP-WG Chairs and the RIPE NCC, we would like some more insight from the Connect community what to do with the IPv4 dust that the RIPE NCC has in the current IPv4 pool (at the bottom.)

We received some conflicting views in AP-WG during the meeting and it would be nice to get more voices than just the two in the room.

There are 3 options what we might be able to do with the last scraps of IPv4 space .. ( mostly smaller than a /24 prefixes ) that are regarded as left-overs or dust as we call them.

Option 1 : hand them to the last one who might come along .. The LIR that will receive them, will not be happy or get any usable routable space ..  ( So this might not be a good option .. )
Option 2 : put it in the temp. pool. That is used for temporary events or research options.
Option 3 : Put it in the IXP pool .. in case someone doesn't want their IXP lan to be routable on the DFZ anyway .. they might also have enough if they receive a /27 for their 10 member IXP LAN.
Especially the Option 3 is what we like to hear some more discussion on .. especially from the Connect WG members..

There might be 2 views, if an IXP lan should be routable or not ??? 

And what is the view of the Connect community on the topics .. so that we can take that as input moving along ..

It would be nice if we can some discussion on this either here ( the Connect WG ML) or on the AP-WG ML. but as all the IXP experts should be here .. both Gert and myself are happy to take the input from here to the AP-WG ML.
As long as we receive your input and views.

Kind regards,
Erik Bais & Gert Döring
Address Policy WG Chairs