[address-policy-wg] 2011-04 Discussion Period extended until 30 January (Extension of the Minimum Size for IPv6 Initial Allocation)

Hi Jan, 

On Tue, Jan 10, 2012 at 09:28:42AM +0100, Jan Zorz @ go6.si wrote:
> On 1/9/12 5:23 PM, Nick Hilliard wrote:
> >maybe we need to disagree.  I don't support the proposal as-is, but would
> >support the proposal if it were to include minimal justification for /29
> >(based on the current default of /32).
> >
> >- it is a minimal change which requires virtually no overhead by the LIR,
> >but will get them to think about whether they really need the space or not.
> 
> I think the price difference in LIR membership will probably make them 
> think - more resources, bigger LIR ;)

That's something for a requester to think about.  

The minimal change Nick talks about above and tracking the reason 
of usage is also of possible interest to the rest of the community. 
Well it rather seems like a minority of it so far. 

The proposed policy change reads like this: 
 No questions asked if the requested IPv6 address space size (to be) 
 allocated to a LIR is >=/32 && <=/29 whatever the intended usage reason is,   
 e.g. the LIR's customer base size, a need for a transition technology. 
Have I missed anything ? 

Martin