Re: [sig-policy] prop-073-v002: Automatic allocation/assignment of IPv6
I echo Izumi's and Jonny's comments, and repeat what I said before. :-)
I really don't see the point of reserving address space for each APNIC
account holder. APNIC has a /12 worth of IPv6 (not counting the initial
/23 received way back when). That is over one *million* /32s. APNIC does
not have anywhere close to one million account holders and I do know
that there are very few account holders who have been allocated more
than a single /32. What problem are we trying to solve?
Terry, you did say early today:
"I'm happy for the secretariat to use the 'reservation' as they see fit,
either at the time of allocation (reservation/allocation becomes one in
the same) or on some other timeline of their choosing."
but this is definitely not how it is expressed in 4.2 or 4.3.
To move forwards, may I suggest removing 4.2, and rewording 4.3 so that
it indicates what an IPv4 account holder would expect by way of IPv6
(without mentioning 'reservation').
philip
--