Re: [sig-policy] returned to list: prop-063: Reducing timeframe of IPv4 allocations from twelve to six months

[Jasper Bryant-Greene <jasper@unleash.co.nz>]

I opposed this policy on the basis that the impact on LIRs who would not
be able to justify a /22 within six months did not seem to have been
considered fully.

My understanding is that without a sister policy which reduced the
minimum allocation size, this would effectively shut out some LIRs from
getting addresses at all, since they would not be able to justify a /22
within six months, while they might previously have been able to within
twelve months. Am I correct in this understanding?

-jasper

On Fri, 2008-08-29 at 16:28 +1200, Randy Bush wrote:
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
> prop-063: Reducing timeframe of IPv4 allocations from twelve to six
>            months
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
> 
> Dear colleagues
> 
> prop-063, "Reducing timeframe of IPv4 allocations from twelve to six
> months" received support in the APNIC 26 Policy SIG but did not reach
> consensus. Therefore, this  proposal is being returned to the Policy
> SIG mailing list for further discussion.
> 
> 
> Proposal details
> ----------------
> 
> APNIC to make allocations based on a six months needs basis, reducing
> it from 12 months.
> 
> 
> Proposal details including the full text of the proposal,
> presentations, links to relevant meeting archives and links to mailing
> hlist discussions are available at:
> 
>       http://www.apnic.net/policy/proposals/prop-063-v001.html
> *              sig-policy:  APNIC SIG on resource management policy           *
> _______________________________________________
> sig-policy mailing list
> sig-policy@lists.apnic.net
> http://mailman.apnic.net/mailman/listinfo/sig-policy