Re: new IPv6 policy draft - real soon now

[David Kessens <]

Mirjam,

On Wed, Apr 14, 1999 at 04:59:18PM +0200, Mirjam Kuehne wrote:
> 
> A working group was created to discuss allocation policies.
> This working group also discussede the initial allocation criteria
> as proposed in the current draft (with participation on the 6bone added
> as one criteria). 

The wg was (interim-)chaired by: Sandra Reimer from McLeadUSA. I hope
we will be able to get the minutes from her as soon as possible.

> The feedback was very positive, also regarding the slow start
> mechanism.  We also received useful input regarding some of the
> parameters in the allocation criteria, for example 12 for the number
> of months within which IPv6 services will have to be provided and 
> 42 :-) for the number of customers the ISP has to have in one of the
> other criteria (we'll probably round this up or down in the final
> document :-)

It was my impression that the number of 42 was the optimal number and
that nobody wanted to have anything less/more ;-). There is no reason
to start playing again with those numbers. Another point that was
discussed was the removal of the condition entirely since the other
condition (intent to provide IPv6 service) was easier to qualify for
anyways.

The biggest concern left was the slow start procedure within the sTLA.
It was discussed at length but no agreement could be reached. The
registries want to have some kind of control against allocations that
are given out that are not used as they are supposed to be used, while
at the same time most customers of the registries would obviously like
to have maximum freedom & minimal paperwork. The registries asked for
alternatives that would have the same effect - one of the variations
that was discussed, was to make the slow start even slower (eg.: you
can only assign a very small number of NLAs before returning to the
registry), and to allocate the full space soon thereafter. It was
agreed that more discussion this topic would be needed.

David K.
---