Sam Dickinson said the following on 31/1/08 10:43:
Two member surveys have been conducted since the IPv6 policy document
was adopted in 2002. In the responses to those surveys, the 'plan
for 200 assignments' criteria was not mentioned as a barrier to
applying for an IPv6 allocation.
Great, thanks very much for your response, Sam.
So, Izumi-san has identified a real problem within the Japanese
community. Yet APNIC member surveys don't show a problem anywhere else
in AsiaPac, which tallies with my experience too.
May I politely suggest that JPNIC works with their membership to clarify
that "come up with a plan for 200 assignments in 2 years" is NOT the
same as "you MUST make 200 assignments in 2 years or else"?
To me it makes no sense making the huge effort to change a regional
policy if the interpretation problem only exists in one member economy.
philip
--