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

Hello Per,

> The only argument in favor of changing policies at this stage is IMHO
> to, if possible, be able to dodge accusations of anti-competitive
> practises against new entrants.

That is indeed the concern that I have.

> All that is required for that is to
> reserve a relatively small block from which everyone who qualify for
> a /32 or larger PA v6-block gets for example a /22 v4-block if they  
> have
> no prior v4 allocation.

Such a policy would solve my main concern. I would remove the  
reference to IPv6 because earlier parts of this discussion showed that  
we don't want to put IPv6 requirements in IPv4 policy. I think just  
reserving a block like this for initial allocations would be enough.

> Everything else that has been suggested are
> policy tweaks which aim to benefit certain types of operators, but  
> they
> make no significant difference to the bigger picture.

It seems more and more people are happy with the current policies and  
don't want to change them for the final /8. Would a simple policy like  
Per suggests be acceptable for everybody?

Thanks,
Sander