It seems Kurt Erik Lindqvist wrote:
That ofcourse depends on what services you want to offer your customers.....
I don't see why you want to break services in order to solve assignment policies? This said, I do realise that there is a assignment policy aspect to this as well.
You might realise that you will end up breaking promises to customers if the offered services collide with acceptable assignment policies. While it is - at first - easy for an ISP to hand out /29's to home users, I really hope that the RIPE NCC will make an effort to prevent service providers from offering this as an off-the-shelf product for Mr. and Mrs. Always-On. We are going to run out of IPv4 space very quickly if the assignment of, for instance, /29's to home users becomes standard procedure at ISP's - and bruno's mail does indicate that this is already happening: "[...]several new ISP in Europe are starting to offer "always on" Internet access. The allocation strategies vary, if they give a subnet to each household this is usually a /29 [...]" Has the RIPE NCC seen any signs of this actually being a trend? If so, is it seen as an acceptable assignment policy? Being an IP bloke with a conscience, I would personally hate to provide our regular home users with /29's. However, should our competitors start doing this, we would of course have to respond. It would be a shame, however, if the commercial struggles should end up leading to a swift exhaustion of IPv4 space. Cheers /Simon