[address-policy-wg] 2011-04, "Extension of the Minimum Size for IPv6 Initial Allocation"
- Previous message (by thread): [address-policy-wg] 2011-04, "Extension of the Minimum Size for IPv6 Initial Allocation"
- Next message (by thread): [address-policy-wg] 2011-04, "Extension of the Minimum Size for IPv6 Initial Allocation"
Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
Nick Hilliard
nick at inex.ie
Fri Nov 18 14:57:33 CET 2011
On 15/11/2011 14:26, Jan Zorz @ go6.si wrote: > Should we put this as optional or suggestion? All RIRs operate on the basis of stated need for their LIR's addressing requirements. 2011-04 suggests increasing the initial allocation from /32 to /29 on the basis that LIRs are going to need to deploy 6rd to their end-users. As an aside, let's stop beating around the bush here: everyone is focussing on 6rd because if it weren't for 6rd, there would be no requirement for 2011-04 - simply because there are no other likely migration mechanisms on the table which a) require lots of extra IP address space and b) look like they might work. Nick
- Previous message (by thread): [address-policy-wg] 2011-04, "Extension of the Minimum Size for IPv6 Initial Allocation"
- Next message (by thread): [address-policy-wg] 2011-04, "Extension of the Minimum Size for IPv6 Initial Allocation"
Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]