[address-policy-wg] 2011-04 Discussion Period extended until 30 January (Extension of the Minimum Size for IPv6 Initial Allocation)
- Previous message (by thread): [address-policy-wg] 2011-04 Discussion Period extended until 30 January (Extension of the Minimum Size for IPv6 Initial Allocation)
- Next message (by thread): [address-policy-wg] 2011-04 Discussion Period extended until 30 January (Extension of the Minimum Size for IPv6 Initial Allocation)
Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
Jan Zorz @ go6.si
jan at go6.si
Thu Jan 5 00:58:05 CET 2012
On 1/4/12 8:01 PM, Nick Hilliard wrote: > On 02/01/2012 14:10, Emilio Madaio wrote: >> - The proposed new section 5.1.2 was reworded >> - Section 5.7 was not removed but it was reworded > > two issues here: > > 1. I don't agree with this revised version for the reasons outlined in: > >> https://www.ripe.net/ripe/mail/archives/address-policy-wg/2011-November/006577.html > > specifically, there is still no justification required to move from /32 to /29. Nick, hi. Yes, as you said. We have been through this discussion and there is no point in re-doing it again. Your suggestion is just inserting the pointless obstacle, making LIRs claim they will do 6rd even if they do not intend to do so - to get /29. We can go around in circles, but I'm not sure we need this :) We thought to insert partially your idea with suggestion, that LIR should clarify just for documentation purposes, why they need more than /29, but at the end decided, that this is not adding anything, just making the policy longer. > > 2. if the plan is to use the entire /29 for the purposes of 6rd (or other > transition tech) - so that you can assign up to a /62 for each 6rd > end-user, then what address space does the LIR use for the rest of its > allocation requirements? I.e. will another allocation will be required for > traditional ipv6 assignments? 30 + 32 = 62 :) Cheers, Jan
- Previous message (by thread): [address-policy-wg] 2011-04 Discussion Period extended until 30 January (Extension of the Minimum Size for IPv6 Initial Allocation)
- Next message (by thread): [address-policy-wg] 2011-04 Discussion Period extended until 30 January (Extension of the Minimum Size for IPv6 Initial Allocation)
Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]