Patrick Greenwell:
None of course.
The question is would you honor microallocations from a RIR if they said "we have designated this particular space for microallocations, would you please accept routes for these netblocks with these prefixes?"
That's what this discussion was about, until the right to have it was questioned. (That's what the 'who decides' questions are about, aren't they?) ARIN could decide to issue /32's to dialup customers so they could change providers without renumbering and it would do no good since nobody would carry those routes. Providers generally filter on allocation boundaries (or are more generous) because they trust the RIRs to set sane allocation policies. It would be a waste of IP space and harm the net as a whole if RIRs adopted a microallocation policy that was too generous and resulted in allocating non-routable IP space. Hence the desire to discuss amount network operators what a reasonable microallocation policy would look like. This is why comments like:
Please explain why the "basement dual-homer" should not have the same right to diversity as the "major services."
And please, be specific.
Don't make any sense. That was my point in replying to you. There is no right to a route in my router. If you want a route in my router, you better find out what routes I'm willing to carry and under what terms. DS