Re: [sig-policy] prop-057: Proposal to change IPv6 initial allocation cr
Randy Bush said the following on 12/2/08 12:50:
Continuing discussion
---------------------
Here are some questions to help discussion continue:
- Do you support or oppose this proposal?
I started off opposing it, but the latest suggested wording proposed by
Izumi-san would allow me to not oppose it. I don't support it, as I
think the problem solved isn't an operational one, but a linguistic or
maybe cultural one.
I've yet to see the entire revised text though - I think this would be
very useful.
- Does this proposal solve a problem you are experiencing? If
so, tell the community about your situation.
Only problem it seems to solve is the mistranslation of the word "plan"
from English into Japanese.
- Do you see any disadvantages in this proposal?
If prop-53 goes through (lowering minimum IPv4 allocation to /24), then
basically anyone who gets a /24 will get an IPv6 /32.
Does the community really want this?
philip
--
- Is there anything in the proposal that is not clear?
- What changes could be made to this proposal to make it more
effective?
Full details of the proposal can be found at:
http://www.apnic.net/policy/proposals/prop-057-v001.html
randy, for the policy sig {chair}
* 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