I agree;

It seems to me that the extreme position that WiFi hotspot type use of PI is in violation because you are sub-assigning addresses for use by outside parties, is missing the point that from a policy perspective a sub-assignment has to have some level of permanence and dedication to it.  The transient or temporary use of some addresses by a customer, a business partner, or even the general public, does not rise to the point of making a sub-assignment from a policy perspective, because it lacks permanence and in most cases is not dedicated to a specific external use, or in other words its dynamic or changing.  

To count as a sub-assignment from a policy perspective the use number resources by an outside party (a customer, a business partner, the general public, etc...) has to be dedicated to the use by a specific external individual or entity for a substantive period of time, like months or years, not just a few hours or days.

While I support the concept of this policy, because of the unique-prefix-per-host work nearing completion in the IETF, I like to see language about prefixes and subnets removed from the policy and maybe replaced with language based on the temporary non-dedicated (dynamic) use instead.

Thanks.