I'm not seeing that as an issue.. Are you worried that those unscrupulous users of IP address
space would take a /22 from the last /8 policy and the transfer it in chunks of /24 to people?
Please clarify why the /24 transfer size in the final /8 is a problem?
I support /24 transfer size very much, Sir. Since you expressed strong objection to /24 allocation
size and don't want this 'be replicated' in the final /8, so I was just wondering if you will
propose to change /24 the minimum transfer size.
Transfers are a different beast to the final /8 allocation. Don't you see that?
What I am suggesting is that the industry will get far better use of those /22 allocations in the
last /8 as for use in v6 transition without being chopped up and micromanaged into /24 slices.
It makes no sense to keep the last /8 immune from /24 delegations, while the dozens of
/8 allocated before the last /8 allowing /24 assignments.
What I now think is keeping this thread going makes little sense. There appears to be no support for this proposal.
Terry