Re: [sig-policy]the size of sparse allocation

To: Takashi Arano <arano at inetcore dot com>
Subject: Re: [sig-policy]the size of sparse allocation
From: Takashi Arano <arano at inetcore dot com>
Date: Wed, 27 Aug 2003 13:05:26 +0900
Cc: sig-policy at apnic dot net
In-reply-to: <5.0.2.5.2.20030827125309.03d52e80@localhost>
List-archive: <http://www.apnic.net/mailing-lists/sig-policy/>
List-help: <mailto:sig-policy-request@lists.apnic.net?subject=help>
List-id: APNIC SIG on resource management policy <sig-policy.lists.apnic.net>
List-post: <mailto:sig-policy@lists.apnic.net>
List-subscribe: <http://mailman.apnic.net/mailman/listinfo/sig-policy>,<mailto:sig-policy-request@lists.apnic.net?subject=subscribe>
List-unsubscribe: <http://mailman.apnic.net/mailman/listinfo/sig-policy>,<mailto:sig-policy-request@lists.apnic.net?subject=unsubscribe>
Sender: sig-policy-admin@lists.apnic.net

Hi,

the outline of IPv6 sparse allocation policy proposal got consensus
in both SIG and AMM as I previously mailed.

One issue still remains about the size of allocation (from IANA to RIRs),
/8 or /12. Let's discuss this in this mailing list.

Regards,
Takashi Arano
*              sig-policy:  APNIC SIG on resource management policy           *
_______________________________________________
sig-policy mailing list
sig-policy at lists dot apnic dot net
http://mailman.apnic.net/mailman/listinfo/sig-policy