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

On Thu, 24 Jun 2004, Gert Doering wrote:
>  - try to come up with new rules for the allocation criteria, dropping
>    the 200-assignments part, and integrate whatever is necessary to
>    balance the remainder.

Wasn't pretty much all of this (except one comment) based on the 
misconception that you'd actually have to have 200 IPv6 customers, not 
that you would have *potential* IPv6 customers (i.e: v4 customers, and 
you willing to give them service)?

So I don't think there was such a strong need for removeing the rule, 
just if we clarified it sufficiently so that people would not (again!) 
interpret it too strongly.

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