On Thu, Jun 6, 2013 at 6:10 PM, Niall O'Reilly <niall.orei...@ucd.ie> wrote:
> > On 6 Jun 2013, at 04:26, Lorenzo Colitti wrote: > > > indeed, the letter of the policy above suggests that a /48 is > acceptable only in the case of "extra large end sites" > > How do you read that into the extract you cited, Lorenzo? Sorry - my statement should have said 'the letter of the policy above suggests that *more than* a /48 is acceptable only in the case of "extra large end sites"'. The argument is the same: - Assigning more than a /48 to an end site is only acceptable in the case of extra large end sites, and/or with substantial paperwork. - Giving a user the use of a full /48 of space *and* using semantic bits requires routing more than a /48 to the per user. - Thus, if ISPs wants to use semantic bits, they will have to give users less than the use of a full /48 of space. Is that clearer now?
-------------------------------------------------------------------- IETF IPv6 working group mailing list ipv6@ietf.org Administrative Requests: https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ipv6 --------------------------------------------------------------------
