[address-policy-wg] Policy proposal: #gamma IPv6 Initial Allocation Criteria
- Previous message (by thread): [address-policy-wg] Policy proposal: #gamma IPv6 Initial Allocation Criteria
- Next message (by thread): [address-policy-wg] Policy proposal: #gamma IPv6 Initial Allocation Criteria
Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
Gert Doering
gert at space.net
Mon Apr 4 15:28:11 CEST 2005
Hi, On Mon, Apr 04, 2005 at 02:26:05PM +0100, Andy Furnell wrote: > > I'd opt for: > > > > c) plan to provide IPv6 connectivity to organisations and > > customers to which it will make assignments _according to the > > rules specified in section 5.4.1_, and will advertise that > > connectivity through its single aggregated address allocation. > > > > just to make it clear that this change doesn't mean "/60s are fine now". > > Exactly. 5.4.1 and RFC3177 are important for the sake of maintaining a > coherent assignment policy, but the size of the assignments an LIR/ISP > is planning on making (which we very much hope will be picked from the > /48 /64 or /128 bucket as per that policy) should not impact their > ability to obtain an allocation in the first place... OK, so we're all in violent agreement, are we? :-) Gert Doering -- NetMaster -- Total number of prefixes smaller than registry allocations: 71007 (66629) SpaceNet AG Mail: netmaster at Space.Net Joseph-Dollinger-Bogen 14 Tel : +49-89-32356-0 D- 80807 Muenchen Fax : +49-89-32356-234
- Previous message (by thread): [address-policy-wg] Policy proposal: #gamma IPv6 Initial Allocation Criteria
- Next message (by thread): [address-policy-wg] Policy proposal: #gamma IPv6 Initial Allocation Criteria
Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]