[address-policy-wg] Hoarding /22 out of 185/8

On Tue, Apr 28, 2015, at 11:25, Carlos Friacas wrote:
> "Need" shouldn't be a criteria anymore, as we're in 
> "scarcity-mode"/"run-out" mode...

"Need" should be a criteria again, exactly because we're in run-out
mode. 
Again, "need" starts and ends with "if needed", *withOUT* the "as much
as you need" part.

> One idea could be: «If the LIR doesn't have any other IPv4 allocation 
> made by the RIPE/NCC (before the run-out phase) besides the /22, if a 
> merge process is needed, the /22 is automatically returned to the pool».

One pretty BAD idea. Not only the small players have a difficult time,
but if some of them merge together, this makes sure they stay small.
Renumbering is generally delicate for acess customers, and goes to very
difficult (adminstratively and process-wise), sometimes limit impossible
to running server and services plafroms.

The idea is to prevent address hoarding in the first place, not to
impose insane limitations on already running things.