[address-policy-wg] 2015-03 New Policy Proposal (Assessment Criteria for IPv6 Initial Allocation Size)

On Mon, May 11, 2015 at 03:58:46PM +0200, Jan Ingvoldstad wrote:
>As Nick states, "I'd be interested to see a real life addressing plan which
>needed more than this amount of bit space." I'd actually be interested to
>see a real life addressing plan that needed a /32 bit address space, where
>the need isn't constructed based on the mere possibility of getting that
>space instead of merely e.g. a few hundre million times of the entire IPv4
>space.

The way I read the proposal, it is not about assignment sizes but
about a "aggregation" vs "conservation" conflict. 
The proponents have, AIUI, a problem where they might not fully
assign a /32 or /29 allocation but have different routing
policies for parts of their network, which cannot be satisfied
without violating s3.4 of ripe-641. 

rgds,
Sascha Luck