[ipv6-wg] Re: [address-policy-wg] 2010-06 New Policy Proposal (Registration Requirements for IPv6 End User Assignments)

password: D0llemin@


Met vriendelijke groet,


ir. A.W. (Andries) Hettema
KPN IP-Office
kpn-ip-office at kpn.com
+31 70 45 13398


>>>>>> Question 1:
>>>>>> Why was chosen for "SUB-ASSIGNED PA" and not for "SUB-ALLOCATED PA" or even "LIR-PARTITIONED PA", [...]
>>> 
>>> [...]
>>> 
>>>> One is to
>>>> aggregate many individual customers into an assignment block.
>>> 
>>> It's a rather bikeshedding issue, but maybe pick AGGREGATED PA?
>>> LIR-PARTITIONED PA would also be easily understandable, but is a mouthful. :)
>> 
>> 
>> I was about to come with the same suggestion. As said, the current one basically is just a placeholder as we needed something in the revision 1 document.
>> 
>> 'AGGREGATED XX' is pretty much unique and clearly describes the whole purpose.
>
>How do people feel about AGGREGATED-BY-LIR ? Stays in line with the current
>ones and describes the purpose.

I like it:)


With kind regards,


ir. A.W. (Andries) Hettema
KPN IP-Office
kpn-ip-office at kpn.com
+31 70 45 13398