Re: [sig-policy] prop-053: Changing minimum IPv4 allocation size to /22

[Gaurab Raj Upadhaya <gaurab@lahai.com>]

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

Toshiyuki Hosaka wrote:
| Dear SIG members
|
| The policy proposal 'prop-053-v001: Changing minimum IPv4 allocation
| size to /24' has been revised by the author in response to community
| feedback on the Policy SIG mailing list.
|
| The new title of the proposal is 'prop-053-v002: Changing minimum IPv4
| allocation size to /22' and the following changes have been made:
|
|     - The suggested minimum allocation size has been changed to a /22
|
|     - The exact fee for the new Tiny membership tier associated with
|       the proposed /22 allocation size has been removed and left for
|       the Policy SIG and APNIC Executive Council to determine

Hi,

Yes. this makes more sense. Changing minimum allocation to /22 is a
reasonable idea. i support this.

Though, it doesn't address the main problem that Rajesh identified - the
high cost of entry to APNIC membership. The initial fee is what puts
small members off. That needs to be addressed - though i am not sure if
this is the right prop. for that.


thanks
~ - gaurab

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.7 (Darwin)
Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org

iD8DBQFHulipSo7fU26F3X0RAmb7AKCtdQlpMIOwkRm8Y5S59zkqMVwMngCg4DQD
V0bSEXIhOnHRWOxB4GoP3NM=
=ZBlr
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----