On Mon, Jun 20, 2016 at 11:30 AM, Jim Reid <jim@rfc1035.com> wrote:

> On 20 Jun 2016, at 09:04, Gert Doering <gert@space.net> wrote:
>
> But I'm close to giving up on this and calling a ban on further changes
> to the IPv4 policy

+1

I'm almost there.

In the early discussion phase, I was tending towards being against the proposal being discussed, with a certain does of "meh, doesn't matter much".

But then all the extremely bad opposing non-arguments kindof have convinced me that 2016-03 is needed, and should probably be implemented.

After that, though, I think further changes are unnecessary.

A possible compromise might be a requirement for future IPv4 policy proposals to show that they do not disadvantage future participants or increase the burn rate of the remaining IPv4 pool. Same thing really.

How does one go about restricting future policy proposals?

Jan