Re: [sig-policy] prop-057-v001: Proposal to change IPv6 initial allocat
Izumi Okutani said the following on 6/2/08 13:42:
I see what you mean and tried to play with some words, but I felt
putting a word that makes it sound like a requirement gives quite a
"plan" doesn't make any requirement at all, as I pointed out before.
Apart from in Japan, it seems. ;-)
In retrospect, I think your new words of:
The LIR should also plan to announce the allocation as a single
aggregated block in the inter-domain routing system within two years.
should be replaced with:
The LIR must also announce the allocation as a single aggregated
block in the inter-domain routing system within two years.
Just delete the word "plan", as a plan is nothing more than a vague
statement of some future intention which may or may not come to pass.
Also change "should" to "must" - that's a commitment now!
As I also indicated before, I'm amused that you propose the word "plan"
for the updated text, yet it was a complete show stopper for the 200
number that you are trying so hard to delete.