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

> I really fail to see the reason behind the 200 other organisation
> rule - perhaps someone would like to explain the logic.

I think the logic is that the RIRs are trying to portion out routing
space so that we don't get a global routing table explosion in IPv6 in
the same way we have (had) in IPv4.  To acheive this, they need to make
sure that the small ISPs don't get their own allocation, but instead go
to their upstream provider for an IPv6 address space delegation.  I
can't really see another reason for this particular aspect of the
policy.

No, I don't think I agree with this policy, but I think I see what the
RIRs are trying to conserve.

I also have to agree with Pekka; "200 assignments to other
organizations" can only be interpreted one way.  Not that 199 or 200
would make all that much of a difference, so that's a minor point.

Regards,

- Håvard