[address-policy-wg] 2011-04 New Draft Document Published (Extension of the Minimum Size for IPv6 Initial Allocation)
- Previous message (by thread): [address-policy-wg] 2011-04 New Draft Document Published (Extension of the Minimum Size for IPv6 Initial Allocation)
- Next message (by thread): [address-policy-wg] 2011-04 New Draft Document Published (Extension of the Minimum Size for IPv6 Initial Allocation)
Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
Tiberiu Ungureanu
tbb at ines.ro
Thu Feb 16 16:08:00 CET 2012
On Wed, 2012-02-15 at 23:50 +0100, Jan Zorz @ go6.si wrote: > On 2/15/12 10:43 PM, Tiberiu Ungureanu wrote: > > Ok, I feel this is troll-feeding, but I'll bite: From what you say, I > > understand that you are dissatisfied with the "_additional_ allocation" > > policy. Why are you trying to change the "_initial_ allocation" policy > > then? If there's a problem with additional allocation policy, fix that, > > don't break this one. > > Hi, > > I don't really understand this comment. Reading the comments on the list I feel I was misunderstood, so here is an attempt to clarify my position: I do NOT oppose 2011-04, on the contrary. I fully support initial allocation of /29. In the subsequent emails on this list, there were voices that said "those who already got /32, under the new policy can only get up to /29 and need to use the hd-ratio policy to get more, while the ones that don't already have ipv6 space have an easier task to get more than /29 on the initial alloc, as they are not restricted by the hd-ratio rule". My position on this is "if you don't like the hd-ratio rule, submit a proposition regarding that policy, and we will be glad to discuss it". Therefore, I would want to see the initial allocation policy changed to allow /29 without justification, but i would not want to see loopholes allowing users that already have a /32 to get more than /29 without being subjected to the hd-ratio policy. I hope that makes it clear where I stand. -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: signature.asc Type: application/pgp-signature Size: 198 bytes Desc: This is a digitally signed message part URL: <https://lists.ripe.net/ripe/mail/archives/address-policy-wg/attachments/20120216/304efc48/attachment.sig>
- Previous message (by thread): [address-policy-wg] 2011-04 New Draft Document Published (Extension of the Minimum Size for IPv6 Initial Allocation)
- Next message (by thread): [address-policy-wg] 2011-04 New Draft Document Published (Extension of the Minimum Size for IPv6 Initial Allocation)
Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]