[arin-ppml] Set aside policy?

[Chris Grundemann]

On Thu, Jul 1, 2010 at 22:33, Martin Hannigan <marty at akamai.com> wrote:
>
>
>
> I’m aware of 4.10 and your proposal.  I’m not thinking about NAT devices or
> small numbers of hosts as transition infrastructure. I’m interesting in
> other ideas. Thanks for pointing everyone at these though.

Section 4.10 is not necessarily limited to NAT or small allocations,
or at least does not have to be. The title refers to facilitating IPv6
deployment, not NAT. The majority of the examples listed are NAT but
that is mostly (I assume) because no other transition methods have
been readily identified. What if we expanded it to a /9 of the last /8
and increased the maximum allocation a bit? Maybe drop the restriction
to once every 3 months? We could also add some language around
transition specifically but I am not sure that is absolutely necessary
to allow the uses you envision...

$.02
~Chris

>
>
> Best,
>
> -M<
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> PPML
> You are receiving this message because you are subscribed to
> the ARIN Public Policy Mailing List (ARIN-PPML at arin.net).
> Unsubscribe or manage your mailing list subscription at:
> http://lists.arin.net/mailman/listinfo/arin-ppml
> Please contact info at arin.net if you experience any issues.

-- 
@ChrisGrundemann
weblog.chrisgrundemann.com
www.burningwiththebush.com
www.coisoc.org