[sig-ipv6] Re: IPv6 Policy Document Revision suggestion

[Gert Doering <gert@space.net>]

Hi,

On Thu, Jul 13, 2000 at 03:47:30PM +0100, stuart.prevost@bt.com wrote:
> 	From reading all the emails it seems that the /48 approach as the
> *minimum* allocation is the way the IETF would like IPv6 deployment to
> proceed.  However, as it has been demonstrated, the /35 allocations today
> would only allow for 8,192 /48 per subTLA, and this is assuming that the
> subTLA holder hasn't split up the NLA block so they can allocate to other
> providers, in which case this figure could be as small as 256 or lower!!!!
> 
> 	I see this as the reason why ISPs consider /48 for a home customer
> as too large, and hence the sliding-window & /56 discussion at the last RIPE
> meeting.

Exactly this was the reason from our side for welcoming the /48, /56, /64
suggestion: having more "elbow space" in the /35 allocated to us, being
able to do reasobale NLA structuring (to our resellers, and to *their*
resellers).

regards,

Gert Doering
        -- NetMaster
-- 
SpaceNet GmbH               Mail: netmaster@Space.Net
Joseph-Dollinger-Bogen 14   Tel : +49-89-32356-0
80807 Muenchen              Fax : +49-89-32356-299

*              sig-ipv6:  APNIC SIG on IPv6 technology and policy issues           *
* To unsubscribe: send "unsubscribe" to sig-ipv6-request@apnic.net *