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 mailing list
sig-policy@lists.apnic.net
http://mailman.apnic.net/mailman/listinfo/sig-policy
