I think that being able to configure an EUI in gateways is a better solution for gateways which do not support a claiming mechanism. If we release the EUI claim after inactivity of the gateway, we will start seeing false positives on registration (the actual owner had an internet outage, lost their EUI and has to climb in their tower to configure a new EUI) and false negatives (someone else squatted the EUI and keeps the gateway active to keep the claim).
Today we have four classes of gateways:
- Gateways with a fixed EUI that have a proof of ownership mechanism and claiming (like TTIG)
- Gateways have an EUI but that allow changing the EUI. No proof of ownership
- Gateways with a fixed EUI. No proof of ownership
- Gateways without an EUI
The problem is really caused by (3) and (4). We should get rid of these. To get rid of (3), we should require gateway vendors to either support claiming (and become (1)) or allow changing the EUI (and become (2)). To support (2) and (4), we can start issuing gateway EUIs from a MAC block owned by The Things Network, just like we do with DevEUIs.