On 28 Oct 2010, at 00:37, Hannigan, Martin wrote:
Allocating each LIR exactly the same sized prefix regardless of _need_ is pretty unfair sll considered. The addresses could be utilized more efficiently addressing qualified need instead.
As I read the proposal, the allocation of a single prefix of the same size to each LIR is not at all regardless of need, but prioritizes a different need -- that of access to the post-depletion market -- over the pre-depletion need to obtain address allocations for assignment to customers. IIUC, the idea here is that the growing Internet will be IPv6-only; that 6to4 gateways or other continuity measures will be required; that the opportunity for new market entrants to run their own continuity infrastructure should be protected; and that a single, small allocation per LIR will afford this protection. That seems pretty _fair_ to me, in the circumstances. ATB Niall