Re: [sig-policy] prop-057-v001: Proposal to change IPv6 initial allocati
I agree this proposal won't lead to promoting IPv6 deployment and this
is not the intention in the first place. Its intention is to remove
unintended barrier for ISPs when they have made a decision to start the
deployment of IPv6.
izumi
Izumi Okutani wrote:
>> Isn't one of the primary roles of an NIR to educate their members on
> interpreting policy correctly?
> Yes, and we do it for those who attend our meetings.
>
> It is still hard to prevent misunderstandings to LIRs who are not
> active, especially small to medium sized ISPs outside Tokyo.
>
> It makes things complicated to explain on websites " the policy
> officially defines these criteria, but you can actually apply if you
> meet the following conditions...". ... so we felt we might as well
> define the policy in a more straight forward manner to avoid unnecessary
> misunderstanndings.
>
>
> izumi
>
> Tim Jones wrote:
>> Leo wrote:
>>> More
>> importantly,
>> how
>> many
>> have
>> not
>> requested
>> IPv6
>> space
>> because
>> they
>>> misunderstood
>> the
>> text
>> to
>> mean
>> that
>> they
>> would
>> not
>> qualify?
>>
>>
>> Isn't one of the primary roles of an NIR to educate their members on interpreting policy correctly?
>>
>> Cheers,
>> Tim.
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> Make the switch to the world's best email. Get the new Yahoo!7 Mail now. www.yahoo7.com.au/worldsbestemail
>>
>>
>> * sig-policy: APNIC SIG on resource management policy *
>> _______________________________________________
>> sig-policy mailing list
>> sig-policy at lists dot apnic dot net
>> http://mailman.apnic.net/mailman/listinfo/sig-policy
>
> * sig-policy: APNIC SIG on resource management policy *
> _______________________________________________
> sig-policy mailing list
> sig-policy at lists dot apnic dot net
> http://mailman.apnic.net/mailman/listinfo/sig-policy