Allocations for "always-on" ISPs

It seems Kurt Erik Lindqvist wrote:
 >That ofcourse depends on what services you want to offer your
 >customers.....
 >
 >I don't see why you want to break services in order to solve assignment
 >policies? This said, I do realise that there is a assignment policy aspect
 >to this as well.

You might realise that you will end up breaking promises to customers if 
the offered services collide with acceptable assignment policies.

While it is - at first - easy for an ISP to hand out /29's to home users, I 
really hope that the RIPE NCC will make an effort to prevent service 
providers from offering this as an off-the-shelf product for Mr. and Mrs. 
Always-On.

We are going to run out of IPv4 space very quickly if the assignment of, 
for instance, /29's to home users becomes standard procedure at ISP's - and 
bruno's mail does indicate that this is already happening:

"[...]several new ISP in Europe are starting to offer "always on" Internet 
access.

The allocation strategies vary, if they give a subnet to each household 
this is usually a /29 [...]"

Has the RIPE NCC seen any signs of this actually being a trend? If so, is 
it seen as an acceptable assignment policy?

Being an IP bloke with a conscience, I would personally hate to provide our 
regular home users with /29's. However, should our competitors start doing 
this, we would of course have to respond. It would be a shame, however, if 
the commercial struggles should end up leading to a swift exhaustion of 
IPv4 space.

Cheers
/Simon