Re: [sig-policy] Policy Proposal for End Site allocation policy for IPv6
>>>> As you are probably aware, I have a feeling that this idea won't be so
>>>> popular in JP.
>>> wow! why. the goal was simple, to separate the prefix length
>>> by which HD is measured from actual assignment size. that is
>>> all. why could someone think this bad? i am very confused.
>> I'm getting confused here too :-).
>> I assumed this was the same proposal as what had been proposed at the
>> ARIN last meeting in Montreal. Doesn't it imply to make assignments on
>> justifiable basis by one bit?
>
> s/imply/allow without affecting how hd is calculated/
If that's all it's proposed, I agree that there shouldn't be any
concerns as you say, but I'm still not completely clear about this.
The concern of some ISPs is that they will be expected to justify their
addressing as result of this proposal and lose the benefit of IPv6
networks which are simple network design and operations.
I've briefly introduced the proposal on our mailling list and received
the comment below:
The size of asssignments should be left upto the decision of
LIRs, i.e, LIRs can decide whether to sustain /48 or other sizes.
In making the decision, LIRs should be able to consider ease of
operations and network design, and not solely the efficient
utilization of address space.
Could we assume this concern is already covered as the decision will be
left upto the LIRs/ISPs?
izumi