j: Next unread message
k: Previous unread message
j a: Jump to all threads
j l: Jump to MailingList overview
I opposed this policy on the basis that the impact on LIRs who would not be able to justify a /22 within six months did not seem to have been considered fully.
My understanding is that without a sister policy which reduced the minimum allocation size, this would effectively shut out some LIRs from getting addresses at all, since they would not be able to justify a /22 within six months, while they might previously have been able to within twelve months. Am I correct in this understanding?
On Fri, 2008-08-29 at 16:28 +1200, Randy Bush wrote:
prop-063: Reducing timeframe of IPv4 allocations from twelve to six months
prop-063, "Reducing timeframe of IPv4 allocations from twelve to six months" received support in the APNIC 26 Policy SIG but did not reach consensus. Therefore, this proposal is being returned to the Policy SIG mailing list for further discussion.
APNIC to make allocations based on a six months needs basis, reducing it from 12 months.
Proposal details including the full text of the proposal, presentations, links to relevant meeting archives and links to mailing hlist discussions are available at:
sig-policy: APNIC SIG on resource management policy *
sig-policy mailing list email@example.com http://mailman.apnic.net/mailman/listinfo/sig-policy