[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.
> 
> * michael.dillon at bt.com (michael.dillon at bt.com) [Thu 17 Sep 
> 2009, 17:13 CEST]:
> >In particular, what if the applicant's competitor just 
> received a much 
> >larger allocation two weeks earlier?
> 
> Same thing that happens when the person in front of you in 
> the line at the cafetaria at work takes that last cupcake: 
> you're outta luck.

Wrong! 

If RIPE has changed their policies so that they apply different
criteria to you and your competitor, you are not out of luck. You
now have grounds for a nice lawsuit against both RIPE and your
competitor.

The point is that if RIPE changes the policy, it has to do so in
a way that does not convert the bad luck of running out of IPv4, 
into selective discrimination.

--Michael Dillon