[address-policy-wg] Revision of Last /8 Allocation Criteria

Hi Garry,

> What I could maybe live with would be if the additional addresses would
> be available from a pool of returned IPv4 addresses only, and only to
> those with available space smaller than /X (like, e.g. /20 or /19)

What I am a bit worried about with a policy like that is the 'flapping' effect. At some point the pool of returned addresses runs out, so the NCC has to refuse requests. Then some more addresses are returned and the pool fill up a bit again, but the existing queue of requests will drain it again, etc.

This might be implemented with a waiting list in a first-come-first-serve manner, but I expect that the time between sending in a request and getting to the top of the list might get to 'multiple years' quite quickly. So it would add a lot of complexity and still not help the newcomers.

Stuff like this is why this working group decided a few years ago to put all the returned space into the main pool instead of making a new pool with a separate policy. If this working group wants to change that now we need to carefully consider the consequences and effects.

Cheers,
Sander