Re: [sig-policy] A second policy proposal for the Policy SIG

To: TOYAMA Katsuyasu <toyama.katsuyasu at lab.ntt dot co dot jp>
Subject: Re: [sig-policy] A second policy proposal for the Policy SIG
From: Randy Bush <randy at psg dot com>
Date: Fri, 2 Jun 2006 07:16:19 -1000
Cc: sig-policy at apnic dot net
List-archive: <http://www.apnic.net/mailing-lists/sig-policy>
List-help: <mailto:sig-policy-request@lists.apnic.net?subject=help>
List-id: APNIC SIG on resource management policy <sig-policy.lists.apnic.net>
List-post: <mailto:sig-policy@lists.apnic.net>
List-subscribe: <http://mailman.apnic.net/mailman/listinfo/sig-policy>, <mailto:sig-policy-request@lists.apnic.net?subject=subscribe>
List-unsubscribe: <http://mailman.apnic.net/mailman/listinfo/sig-policy>, <mailto:sig-policy-request@lists.apnic.net?subject=unsubscribe>
References: <E1Fm3Tn-0002YV-00@alum.sinica.edu> <44802F75.4050503@lab.ntt.co.jp>


> (1) the target of portable assignment is limited only to end sites
>     which are multihomed or plan to be multihomed, while Jordi does
>     not restrict the target.
> ...
> (2) assignment size is same as the size of non-portable assignment, /48,
>     while Jordi's proposal is /32.

this actually makes sense from at least this operator's point
of view.  it solves a real problem and scales as well or better
than any other approach, with no extra pollution.

thank you.

randy