[ppml] Policy Proposal: IPv6 Assignment Guidelines - version 3
briand at ca.afilias.info
Fri Aug 24 18:50:12 EDT 2007
Brian Dickson wrote:
> Leo Bicknell wrote:
>> In a message written on Fri, Aug 24, 2007 at 04:14:42PM -0400, Howard, W. Lee wrote:
>>>> So all Michael's policy would do would be to change the application
>>>> to be on requests 3-n, where as without it it would apply to 2-n.
>>>> Which is why I submit the are orthogonal.
>>> I was with you until this. What are "2-n" and "3-n"?
>> As it stands now, there is
>> initial allocation, additional request, additional request ...
>> That is, requests 2-n are additional requests, where this policy would
>> come into play.
>> With Michael's idea, the path could be:
>> initial allocation, mulligan, additional request, additional request ...
>> Making requests 3-n additional requests where this policy would come
>> into play.
> Ah. It would likely confuse folks less to use the perl-style elipsis,
> 2..n instead of 2-n (which can be interpreted too many ways, like about
> 2^n ways :-)).
> So, it is 2..n vs 3..n, or rather that network #1, vs networks #1 and #2
> (which becomes (!!) #1).
... have special rules (or are grandfathered). (Forgot to complete the
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Size: 232 bytes
Desc: not available
More information about the ARIN-PPML