[address-policy-wg] ring-fencing v4 space for IXPs in 2011-05

On 27 Oct 2011, at 17:54, Andy Davidson wrote:

>> I wonder too about how this policy could be gamed. What happens if  
>> new (or existing) LIRs pretend to be IXPs to snatch extra v4 space  
>> they wouldn't otherwise get?
>
> The IPRAs were very diligent enough to prevent this from happening  
> when IXPs were allowed v6 PI, when all other organisations were not.
>
> There was a clean definition written which has stood firm in later  
> analysis in ap sessions.
>
> I think this risk is well mitigated against.

OK. Thanks Andy. I raised this as a theoretical concern. So provided  
the IPRAs can keep a lid on potential abuse of the policy, that's  
(sort of) fine. That'll be "good enough" IMO. I don't have a strong  
objection to the proposal even though I still have some reservations.