Re: [sig-policy] Policy Proposal for End Site allocation policy for IPv6
- To: Izumi Okutani <izumi at nic dot ad dot jp>
- Subject: Re: [sig-policy] Policy Proposal for End Site allocation policy for IPv6
- From: Save Vocea <save at apnic dot net>
- Date: Tue, 4 Jul 2006 11:38:17 +1000
- Cc: sig-policy at apnic dot net
- In-reply-to: <44A88ED7.40608 at nic dot ad dot jp>
- List-archive: <http://www.apnic.net/mailing-lists/sig-policy>
- List-help: <mailto:sig-policy-request@lists.apnic.net?subject=help>
- List-id: APNIC SIG on resource management policy <sig-policy.lists.apnic.net>
- List-post: <mailto:sig-policy@lists.apnic.net>
- List-subscribe: <http://mailman.apnic.net/mailman/listinfo/sig-policy>, <mailto:sig-policy-request@lists.apnic.net?subject=subscribe>
- List-unsubscribe: <http://mailman.apnic.net/mailman/listinfo/sig-policy>, <mailto:sig-policy-request@lists.apnic.net?subject=unsubscribe>
- References: <6.2.0.14.2.20060318054818.02ef9818@localhost> <44A4BBBE.7060100@nic.ad.jp> <17573.62727.299147.483957@roam.psg.com> <44A87DDE.2020700@nic.ad.jp> <17576.35889.33024.130503@roam.psg.com> <44A88ED7.40608@nic.ad.jp>
Izumi, On 03/07/2006, at 1:28 PM, Izumi Okutani wrote:
One more question I have is whether this proposal removes the currently /48 boundary for requiring second opinion requests.oops! we are entering territory i do not know well. perhaps geoff or someone else should speak.:-) yes, someone had also pointed out to me that there are no second opinion requests in ARIN. In AP, LIRs are required to submit a second opinion request to APNIC hostmaster if they make assignments shorter than /48. It may sound a little operational to discuss it here, but I'm pretty sure that I'd get these questions from LIRs in JP, so it would help if someone could answer this point for me.
The practice for second opinion request to APNIC for assignments shorter than /48 will remain as stated in the current policy. Save