| | | | | | | | |
|
|
|
You're here: Home |
> Do you have special intention to give only 1st and 2nd allocation > example? If not, how about to change (2) to 'subsequent(following?) > allocation', and describe 2nd allocation as an example? Good point, I agree. > And I think it's better to separate 'number of /48s' and 'prefix > size' issue. At 1st allocation, an ISP gets one more /32 (this ISP has > /31 prefix), and at 2nd subsequent allocation, the ISP gets one more > /31(/30 prefix, consequently) (is this correct?). Sorry, I'm not sure if I understand your point. Could you please explain a little bit more? Do you mean that we should seperate the subsequent allocation size and the total number of address the ISP has at the time of request? Izumi JPNIC
