I agree that address allocations that originated from the various
registries pose a different problem, for which there is no clear-cut
solution. I imagine that the various ISPs will decide how to handle
it themselves, as some already do.
Again, we're [collectively] not trying to dictate address allocation or
routing policy. What we *are* trying to do is document a Best Current
Practices procedural issue, which can be used as reference. If some
organizations wish to use it as a basis for policy, that's fine too.
I'm not naive enough to believe that this draft, as a BCP, will be
viewed as the end-all-be-all policy doctrine, and that if you as an
ISP or end-system network do not adhere to the letter of the document
you will be flogged with a wet noodle. Bah.
This draft simply documents the rationale and reasoning for 'address
lending' instead of 'ownership', and why address portability is no
longer a luxury that can be expected.
Yes, it may be unpopular. Does it actually represent 'Best Current
Practice'? I believe it does. Should it instead be moved ahead as
'Informational'? I don't believe so, as Curtis and others do, since
it would then give the appearance of levity.
- paul