[address-policy-wg] IPv6 Policy Clarification - Initial allocation criteria "d)"

My opinions..

On Mon, 14 Jun 2004, Laura Cobley wrote:
> Below is an excerpt from the IPv6 Address Allocation and Assignment
> Policy:
> 
>     5.1.1. Initial allocation criteria "d)"
> 
>     "To qualify for an initial allocation of IPv6 address space, an
>     organisation must [...] have a plan for making at least 200 /48
>     assignments to other organisations within two years."
> 
> 
>  1. According to this criterion, LIRs who are operators planning to only
>     make /64 assignments appear not to qualify. Was this the community's
>     intention?

The recommended policy is to make /48 assignments, so encouragement in
this policy does not hurt.  So, I'd maybe interpret this as "if you
plan to make so many /64 assignments that 200 /48's wouldn't be
enough, you may get an allocation".

Means that guide LIRs towards Doing the Right Thing wrt. assignments 
are not a bad idea.

>  2. There are a number of interpretations of requirement "d)":
> 
>     - NUMBER OF ASSIGNMENTS
> 
>         -- The LIR has to have a plan to make at least 200 separate /48
>            assignments. Possible scenario: LIR must make 200 assignments
>            and the size of each must be a /48.
> 
>         -- The LIR has to have a plan to make at least the equivalent of
>            200 /48 assignments. Possible scenario: LIR can assign one
>            /41 and seventy-two /48s.
> 
>     Which interpretation was intended regarding the number of
>     assignments?

IMHO, the former.  The latter would be a loophole, and there shouldn't 
be a need for making many allocations larger than /48 in any case (and 
if they are made, there will have to be permission from RIPE NCC in 
any case, as of today)

>     - RECIPIENT OF ASSIGNMENTS
> 
>         -- The LIR has to have a plan to make these 200 assignments to
>            200 separate organisations (regardless of which
>            organisation). Possible scenario: LIR can make 1 assignment
>            to its own organisation and 199 assignments to 199
>            "different" organisations.

No, your own allocations are not counted.

>         -- The LIR has to have a plan to make these 200 assignments to
>            200 separate organisations outside of its own infrastructure.
>            Possible scenario: LIR must make 200 assignments to 200
>            "different" organisations. Assignments to its own
>            organisation will not be counted.

This was what was meant, I think.
 
>         -- The LIR has to have a plan to make these assignments to 200
>            separate networks (regardless of which organisation these
>            networks belong to). Possible scenario: LIR makes 200
>            assignments to 200 networks. 100 can be for its own
>            infrastructure and 100 can be for another single
>            organisation.
> 
>         -- The LIR has to have a plan to make these assignments to 200
>            separate networks outside of its own infrastructure. Possible
>            scenario: LIR makes 200 assignments to 200 networks "outside
>            of its own infrastructure".

These two are just variants of the above assuming that "NUMBER OF 
ASSIGNMENTS" (above) does not need to be at least 200.
 
-- 
Pekka Savola                 "You each name yourselves king, yet the
Netcore Oy                    kingdom bleeds."
Systems. Networks. Security. -- George R.R. Martin: A Clash of Kings