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

On Thu, 17 Jun 2004, Kurt Erik Lindqvist wrote:
> > Because the original text required that the assignments are made to
> > the *other* organizations.  By all logic, only the assignments to the
> > others should count.
> >
> > In any case, your own infrastructure shouldn't take more than a /48 or
> > something like that, so it wouldn't be useful to count it either: 199
> > or 200 makes no difference -- this would become bad if you could just
> > assign e.g. /38 to your own infrastructure and state you've
> > already assigned worth of 200 /48's.
> 
> See the email from Amar. Also, if you have several operating companies 
> you might want to have separate assignments for each of them.

I saw that -- but I don't see *any* justification for this
interpretation.  Remember, the goal is to require 200 assignments to
*other* organizations, not be satisfied that you can make 200
assignemnts to your internal network, or 100 assignments to your
internal network and 100 to other organizations!

-- 
Pekka Savola                 "You each name yourselves king, yet the
Netcore Oy                    kingdom bleeds."
Systems. Networks. Security. -- George R.R. Martin: A Clash of Kings