[address-policy-wg] Proposal 2010-2

On Mon, Nov 1, 2010 at 21:45, Chris Grundemann <cgrundemann at gmail.com> wrote:

> True, but we have found ways of gauging utilization of IPv4 addresses
> without too much effort. Their are some fairly low-touch requirements
> that could be applied here for IPv6 addresses as well. Such as;
> entry's in WHOIS, network diagrams/plans, subnetting plans, an
> announcement in the BGP table, etc.

All those are easy to trivial to fake. That being said, adding them is
not a bad thing as long as valid requests are not held up too much.


> It's very possible that we are too late to make an appreciable
> difference to standard allocations, agreed. Hopefully this does solve
> itself but it may be worth considering such a requirement WRT not only
> standard allocations but also post-depletion transfers (i.e. a change
> to section 5.3 would effect transfers under section 5.5).

Not a bad idea. I think I like it :)


> $0.02

Itym €0.02 ;)

Richard