[arin-ppml] V6 address allocation policy

[George Bonser]

> >
> > I suppose they can only go by their current policy guidelines and
> > apparently it is policy to allocate only what is needed for the
> > immediate foreseeable future.
> >
> The current policy is justified need.  I think that is a stricter
> interpretation
> than is necessary, but, I don't know if that matters.  Will we see you
> at the Toronto meeting?  

Huh?  http://www.nanog.org/meetings/future/index.php

When is Toronto?  I will be lucky to make it to San Francisco and that
is just up the road a piece.

> I hope you will participate and express your
> support for whatever changes you think are needed to IPv6 policy.

I like prop106 from an end user's perspective.  It certainly makes
things simple.  What is hard to gauge is address requirements having
been living in the NAT world for so long and address conservation having
been a major constraint on design. It is going to take a while to break
out of that kind of thinking.