[address-policy-wg] Vanity address allocations and the end of IPv4

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.