[arin-ppml] Draft Policy 2010-12: IPv6 Subsequent Allocation - Last Call (text revised)

Matthew Petach <mpetach at> writes:

> I support 2010-12, but would like to see the phrase "reclaimed if it is not
> in use" replaced with "reclaimed if it is no longer in use for transitional
> purposes."  This space is *just* for use for transitional technologies,
> not for native v6, there are separate allocation policies in place to handle
> native deployments, and we need to ensure that people do no simply
> start putting native customers on this space, and then never give it
> up, citing the "still in use" clause.  I really, really don't want to see
> transitional mechanisms turn into the new swamp.  Once the transition
> is done, and you've gone native...give back the transitional block, and
> move on.

This would be a good improvement.  I support it.