j: Next unread message
k: Previous unread message
j a: Jump to all threads
j l: Jump to MailingList overview
Hi Owen, Mike,
Thank you for your comments.
I'm the author of prop-112.
The purpose of this policy proposal is not to align the boundary but to utilize unused space. Up to /29 is reserved for each /32 in the legacy space.
| From: email@example.com [mailto:firstname.lastname@example.org] On Behalf Of Owen DeLong | Sent: Wednesday, 4 February 2015 4:05 p.m. | To: Masato Yamanishi | Cc: email@example.com | Subject: Re: [sig-policy] [New Policy Proposal ] prop-112: On demand expansion of IPv6 address allocation size in legacy IPv6 space | | I will again oppose this as written. I would much rather see policy deliver nibble-boundary based allocations. | | I would rather see such organizations issued new /28s than expand these /32s into /29s.
And renumbering will be necessary for this expansion, and the legacy space folders have used their address space for a long time, it might be difficult.
Technically, I also think nibble boundary is reasonable, but that should be considered in other proposal.
Yours Sincerely, -- Tomohiro Fujisaki