Izumi Okutani said the following on 31/1/08 19:18:
Having said that, I'm pretty open to modifications as long as we don't end up giving IPv6 allocations to anyone.
How about simply making the IPv6 allocation minimum requirements mirror those for IPv4? Jordi's and this proposal simply say that "an LIR will get an IPv6 /32 if they ask for it, no questions". Do we want to do this? It ends up giving IPv6 to anyone who signs up as an APNIC or APNIC NIR member - which is how I believe it works in at least one other RIR region.
From http://www.apnic.net/policy/add-manage-policy.html, an IPv4 allocation of a /21 is made if the LIR can justify a /23 now (section 9.3), and can demonstrate a plan to use a /22 in a year.
If we translate that into IPv6 equivalents, that would be "justify a /30 now, and demonstrate a plan to use a /31 in a year to get a /32" - which is considerably more than the 200 (which is not even a /40) in the existing IPv6 policy. Do we want to go here? 200 sounds a lot easier to me! ;-)
philip --