[ppml] Incentive to legacy address holders

[Randy Bush]

>> 2050 was after most of what we call legacy was allocated.  it was well
>> into the nsi years, and one year before arin.  most was allocated by the
>> early '90s.
> 
> Randy, I agree, but note that RFC 2050's authorship includes most of
> the folks who performed those allocations (and earlier ones), including
> Jon.  The allocation paperwork trail certainly could have been better,
> but it's hard to argue on the intent of RFC2050, which explicitly calls
> forth the right of  the IANA to invalidate right to invalidate any IP
> assignments once it is determined the the requirement for the address
> space no longer exists.
> 
> If someone wants to claim that they received their assignment in the
> early days and that it carries no social obligations whatsoever, they're
> free to do so.  Jon's not here to argue, and we didn't see fit to make it
> explicit in the forms, so it's an easy position to defend (at least from a
> legal perspective).

the problem is that there was no perceived or legal obligation until
maybe '94-ish.  otherwise we would have not had such a damned uphill war
to get cidr rolled.  if there was a culture of conservation, would we
have tossed out Bs and As just like we are tossing out /32s in ipv6
space now?

randy