[address-policy-wg] 2015-03 New Draft Document and Impact Analysis Published (Assessment Criteria for IPv6 Initial Allocation Size)

* Mathew Newton

> It was our (uk.mod's) expectation/assumption that it would be
> possible to return an existing allocation (in an 'unused/as-new'
> state) and apply for another under the new criteria.

Hi Matthew,

If your /29 remains unused I suppose I was wrong to consider you an
early adopter of IPv6... ;-)

I'm thinking more of an organisation that, e.g., received an /29 (as
that was what the policy permitted at the time) and actually started
using it as best they could. After the passage of 2015-03 they'd like
to get a /28-or-larger under the new allocation criteria, but
un-deploying what they currently have in production in order to do so
might not be operationally feasible. Their situation is then very
similar to the one that 2015-02 «Keep IPv6 PI When Requesting IPv6
Allocation» sought to fix.

Just to be clear, I'm not objecting to the proposal as it currently
stands; I just thought the case was worth while mentioning. If you'd
rather let whomever ends up in that situation to also be the one to fix
it (through a 2015-02-ish proposal), then that's fair enough as far as
I'm concerned.

Tore