[address-policy-wg] IPv6 Policy Clarification - Initial allocation criteria "d)"
- Previous message (by thread): [address-policy-wg] IPv6 Policy Clarification - Initial allocation criteria "d)"
- Next message (by thread): [address-policy-wg] IPv6 Policy Clarification - Initial allocation criteria "d)"
Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
Pekka Savola
pekkas at netcore.fi
Thu Jun 17 11:20:49 CEST 2004
On Thu, 17 Jun 2004, Kurt Erik Lindqvist wrote: > > Because the original text required that the assignments are made to > > the *other* organizations. By all logic, only the assignments to the > > others should count. > > > > In any case, your own infrastructure shouldn't take more than a /48 or > > something like that, so it wouldn't be useful to count it either: 199 > > or 200 makes no difference -- this would become bad if you could just > > assign e.g. /38 to your own infrastructure and state you've > > already assigned worth of 200 /48's. > > See the email from Amar. Also, if you have several operating companies > you might want to have separate assignments for each of them. I saw that -- but I don't see *any* justification for this interpretation. Remember, the goal is to require 200 assignments to *other* organizations, not be satisfied that you can make 200 assignemnts to your internal network, or 100 assignments to your internal network and 100 to other organizations! -- Pekka Savola "You each name yourselves king, yet the Netcore Oy kingdom bleeds." Systems. Networks. Security. -- George R.R. Martin: A Clash of Kings
- Previous message (by thread): [address-policy-wg] IPv6 Policy Clarification - Initial allocation criteria "d)"
- Next message (by thread): [address-policy-wg] IPv6 Policy Clarification - Initial allocation criteria "d)"
Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]