[address-policy-wg] Another small IPv6 allocation policy change proposal (sanity check email)...

Am Fri, 9 Nov 2012 13:49:51 +0100
schrieb Gert Doering <gert at space.net>:

...

> Actually, I think the IPRAs are reading something in there that has
> not been the intention by the WG (and it should be obvious from the 
> discussions that it wasn't, because the case "what about a LIR that
> has more than one /32?" was never discussed)
> 
> For non-native speakers (like me), the sentence above is perfectly
> fine to be interpreted as "... extensions of *any of these*
> allocations up to a total of /29..." and not "... up to a total of
> a /29 across all IPv6 stock the LIR has".

From an old programmers paradigm "be liberate on what you receive and strict
what you send" I would interpret the policy like the NCC (to be on the safe side).

Under business and policy aspects, your reasoning absolutely makes sense to me.

+1 for your suggestion.

	Andreas
-- 

Andreas Schachtner

afs Holding GmbH
communication technologies & solutions
http://afs-com.de/

Geschaeftsfuehrer Andreas Schachtner
HRB 15448, Amtsgericht Dortmund