Re: [address-policy-wg] Revised 2006-01 set back to Discussion Phase (Provider Independent (PI) IPv6 Assignments for End User Organisations)

[Nick Hilliard nick@localhost]

Ana Matic wrote:
> We encourage you to review this policy proposal and send your comments
> to address-policy-wg@localhost before 23 December 2008.

This proposal has improved substantially since v3.0, and it is long
overdue. While I support it as-is, I have two comments.

- the "temporary" status of the proposal has been changed to permanent.
This is a good move, and merely recognition that reclaiming address space
is an enormously difficult challenge, even if assigned on a temporary basis.

- while a requirement for multihoming is useful, it should be made clear
during implementation that this is not necessarily a requirement for
multihoming using ASNs and BGP on the public Internet (however we care to
define that term).  Private interconnection to third parties is also a
fully legitimate justification for assignment of provider independent
number resources.

Nick