Re: [sig-policy] prop-057-v001: Proposal to change IPv6 initial allocati

To: Tim Jones <tim_jones2003 at yahoo dot com>
Subject: Re: [sig-policy] prop-057-v001: Proposal to change IPv6 initial allocation criteria
From: Jonny Martin <jonny at jonnynet dot net>
Date: Sat, 26 Jan 2008 13:35:10 +1300
Cc: Che-Hoo CHENG <chcheng at ieee dot org>, sig-policy at lists dot apnic dot net
Delivered-to: sig-policy at mailman dot apnic dot net
In-reply-to: <277222.91552.qm at web33115.mail.mud dot yahoo dot com>
List-archive: <http://mailman.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: <277222.91552.qm@web33115.mail.mud.yahoo.com>

On 26/01/2008, at 1:16 PM, Tim Jones wrote:

Is there really a problem here that we are fixing, or are we justarguing
over semantics?


The latter, I believe.

APNIC staff - how many organisations have been denied v6 space under

the current proposal?


Cheers,
Jonny.