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

On Tue, May 12, 2015 at 2:34 PM, Sascha Luck [ml] <apwg at c4inet.net> wrote:

> On Tue, May 12, 2015 at 01:28:39PM +0200, Jan Ingvoldstad wrote:
>
>> Apparently, my point was not very reader friendly, so I'll try again:
>> Routing-wise, someone with 64 billion billion billion addresses, have
>> about
>> 16 billion billion ways to route the entire IPv4 internet, within the
>> address space constraints of a /32 allocation.
>>
>
> In theory, yes. But the policy currently contradicts itself to an
> extent.
>
> Section 3.8 of ripe-641 clearly states: "In IPv6 address policy,
> the goal of aggregation is considered to be the most important."
> ss3.4 and 3.5 bear that out also.
>
> Yet, s5.1.2 seems to exclude aggregation as a valid reason for an
> allocation. The Proposal merely attempts to remove this
> contradiction.


Well, yes, that's why I first wrote "This change makes sense … I support
it".
-- 
Jan
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: </ripe/mail/archives/address-policy-wg/attachments/20150512/5be461fa/attachment.html>