I have previously supported prop-090. I didn't share your concerns relating to section 4.5 because it talks about an "allocation", and believed that term only applies to LIRs / ISPs. I understood that a university, government department (like mine, for example) or company wanting lots of multi-homed IPv6 would be getting an "assignment", not an "allocation", from APNIC. Hence the provisions you're concerned about would not apply. I hope I'm still right Regards Mike -----Original Message----- From: sig-policy-bounces at lists dot apnic dot net [mailto:sig-policy-bounces at lists dot apnic dot net] On Behalf Of Andy Linton Sent: Wednesday, 9 February 2011 8:07 a.m. To: sig-policy at lists dot apnic dot net Subject: Re: [sig-policy] IPv6 proposals summary and call for discussion [snip] I'm less keen on the allocation criteria in Section 4.5. Sections 4.5.2 and 4.5.3 as written prevent any new organisation who isn't an ISP from obtaining IPv6 address space for their own use. So a new university, government department or company who may have many hundreds or thousands of users can't multihome using IPv6 because they don't plan to give out address space to other organisations? We had criteria like these in place for IPv4 because we've recognised for many years it was a scarce resource and people have fabricated requests to the RIRs to justify their wants. Let's have delegation criteria but not these ones. [snip] The information contained in this Internet Email message is intended for the addressee only and may contain privileged information, but not necessarily the official views or opinions of the New Zealand Defence Force. If you are not the intended recipient you must not use, disclose, copy or distribute this message or the information in it. If you have received this message in error, please Email or telephone the sender immediately.