[address-policy-wg] Re: 2006-02 Discussion Period extended until 19 March 2007 (IPv6 Address Allocation and Assignment Policy)

Sascha,

Sascha Lenz wrote:
> Hi,
> 
> Gert Doering schrieb:
> 
>> Hi everybody,
[...]
> 
> I supported the key point of the proposal (getting rid of some no longer
> needed obstacles for LIRs who want to get an IPv6 Allocation) from the
> start, so the changes are fine with me.
> 
> I don't think there are any relevant downsides like (relevant) routing
> table growth -> i don't see _any_ downsides from the main changes.
> 
> What i won't do now is commenting on minor wording issues; i want this
> proposal to be passed, NOW, not to continue some more years with some
> more versions of the draft. I think this can be dealt with in a
> follow-up proposal if really needed in this case. The main points are fine.

thanks for pointing out *that* aspect, I am with you.

My proposal was more along the lines of - if we have to touch it again, anyway,...

> (BTW: This is not a personal issue, i have all my IPv6 Allocations
> already :-) I just want to get this done for the sake of IPv6
> distribution since we're discussing about that for ages now!)

Same here :-)
Wilfried.