Re: [address-policy-wg] 2007-08 New Draft Document Published (Enabling Methods for Reallocation of IPv4 Resources)

[Leo Vegoda <leo.vegoda@localhost]

On 08/10/2008 4:44, "michael.dillon@localhost" <michael.dillon@localhost wrote:

>>>    It is contrary to the goals of this document
>>>    and is not in the interests of the Internet
>>>    community as a whole for address space to be
>>>    considered freehold property.
>>
>> Why should an IPv4 policy document take IPv6 policy documents
>> into account?  "Different circumstances".
>
> Same stakeholders. Same organization. And the statement does not
> make any distinction between the two versions of IP.

Actually, the first sentence to that document starts with the words: "This
document defines registry policies for the assignment and allocation of
globally unique IPv6 addresses". It is very clear that it doesn't apply to
IPv4.

The fact that IPv4 is almost completely allocated while IPv6 is almost
completely empty seems relevant to me. I'd like to think that the policy
took appropriate account of the circumstances.

Regards,

Leo Vegoda