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

> >  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.

I don't think you really believe this, either of you.

First, I don't think anyone believes that mobile operators, who plan
to make 50 million /64 assignments and no /48 assignments, do not
qualify for IPv6 allocations from RIPE.

Second, I don't think that anyone believes that it is the "right thing"
for a mobile operator to assign 50 million /48 blocks, one to each
customer handset.

I think the community's intention was to happily offer IPv6 addresses
to mobile operator LIRs who are moving beyond their small GPRS deployments
and beginning to build true 3G ubiquitous wireless networks. But, often
policies need to be edited and re-edited in order to clearly express the
intention.