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: Randy Bush <randy at psg dot com>
Date: Fri, 7 Jul 2006 08:02:23 -1000
Cc: sig-policy at apnic dot net
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> <17578.377.985596.795784@roam.psg.com> <44AA4134.8000008@nic.ad.jp> <17578.52039.393310.479138@roam.psg.com> <44ACE0D0.2070301@nic.ad.jp>

> addressing as result of this proposal and lose the benefit of IPv6
> networks which are simple network design and operations.

a reading of the proposal document would not seem to justify this
concern.

>    The size of asssignments should be left upto the decision of
>    LIRs, i.e, LIRs can decide whether to sustain /48 or other sizes.

the proposal does not affect this.

once again.  the proposal is merely a small hack to make the
calculation of hd independent of assignment size.  it DOES NOT
say anything about assignment policy.

randy