Our position is neutral. At the point of promoting IPv6 deployment, we support this. But,
When "Go IPv6" criteria (it probably means 9.2.1. in policy document) was implemented,
we were expecting to use IPv6 in an IPv4 network.
This proposal is different from above assumption, so it feels little strange.
In addition to this, we feel that small assignment tend to obscure the resource holder to which prefix is assigned. It is necessary to properly grasp them.