[address-policy-wg] 2013-03 New Policy Proposal (No Need - Post-Depletion Reality Adjustment and Cleanup)

On 21/03/2013 15:32, Tore Anderson wrote:
> This was not the case prior to the "last /8" policy - if it wasn't for
> the need principle, an LIR would have been able to repeatedly go to the
> NCC and receive space that it could in turn delegate further in an
> wasteful manner. With the "last /8" policy in effect, however, this
> safety mechanism is no longer necessary - because no matter how
> excessively an LIR makes delegations to its end users, it can only
> receive a single /22 from the space covered by the "last /8" policy, ever.

But they can also reveive much bigger spaces from buying them. Then
they will no be constrained anymore by the fair use policy.

So what could happen is that large IP spaces get sold and used thus
exceeding very much the simple /22 spaces you mention. Maybe sometimes
"fair use" users could even be moved away to make spaces available
for selling in the worst cases (I know this is a very pessimistic
example but I'm pretty sure it will happen). Less dramatically never
decreasing cases of "for money" or simply "bad" assignments will
occur, just like entropy does (quantity of mess in a natural system).

I believe a good policy should ensure free space returns to available
pool for fair use needs, but since allocation transfer is allowed it
should not be an allowed bypass of such a fair policy.

With time, users and LIRs will just stop using IPv4, but until this
happens I believe we need fair use and conservation principle.

NB: "private" space does not exist for me : internet *is* public, all
of it, and ressources are delegated to LIRs, then users, but not owned
by them.