[address-policy-wg] 2011-04 New Draft Document Published (Extension of the Minimum Size for IPv6 Initial Allocation)

On Wed, 2012-02-15 at 23:50 +0100, Jan Zorz @ go6.si wrote:
> On 2/15/12 10:43 PM, Tiberiu Ungureanu wrote:
> > Ok, I feel this is troll-feeding, but I'll bite: From what you say, I
> > understand that you are dissatisfied with the "_additional_ allocation"
> > policy. Why are you trying to change the  "_initial_ allocation" policy
> > then? If there's a problem with additional allocation policy, fix that,
> > don't break this one.
> 
> Hi,
> 
> I don't really understand this comment. 

Reading the comments on the list I feel I was misunderstood, so here is
an attempt to clarify my position:

I do NOT oppose 2011-04, on the contrary. I fully support initial
allocation of /29.

In the subsequent emails on this list, there were voices that said
"those who already got /32, under the new policy can only get up to /29
and need to use the hd-ratio policy to get more, while the ones that
don't already have ipv6 space have an easier task to get more than /29
on the initial alloc, as they are not restricted by the hd-ratio rule".
My position on this is "if you don't like the hd-ratio rule, submit a
proposition regarding that policy, and we will be glad to discuss it".

Therefore, I would want to see the initial allocation policy changed to
allow /29 without justification, but i would not want to see loopholes
allowing users that already have a /32 to get more than /29 without
being subjected to the hd-ratio policy.

I hope that makes it clear where I stand.
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 198 bytes
Desc: This is a digitally signed message part
URL: </ripe/mail/archives/address-policy-wg/attachments/20120216/304efc48/attachment.sig>