Re: [sig-policy] prop-102-v002: Sparse allocation guidelines for IPv6 re
> I have had some feedback while at the meeting that there may be some
> reluctance to support this policy based on the fact that it places a
> policy requirement for the use of sparse allocation on the
> secretariat.
>
> Would there be more support for this policy if that requirement was
> removed and the policy simply required that any sparse allocation
> algorithm be documented?
The requirement should (in theory) be a no-op.
One of the justifications the RIRs used for demanding an IPv6 /12 from IANA was that they needed that amount of space in order to do sparse allocation. If an RIR is not doing sparse allocation, then (in theory) the "original criteria" under which the allocation to the RIR was made would no longer be met, thus under RFC 2050, IANA could reclaim that RIR's /12[1]. Documenting the requirement to do sparse allocation would probably be useful in terms of transparency, but should not have any actual impact. Documenting the actual algorithm used would definitely be useful in the sense that it lets everyone know what to expect.
Regards,
-drc
[1] "In theory there is no difference between theory and practice. In practice there is." -- Yogi Berra