Sascha, Sascha Lenz wrote:
Hi,
Gert Doering schrieb:
Hi everybody, [...]
I supported the key point of the proposal (getting rid of some no longer needed obstacles for LIRs who want to get an IPv6 Allocation) from the start, so the changes are fine with me.
I don't think there are any relevant downsides like (relevant) routing table growth -> i don't see _any_ downsides from the main changes.
What i won't do now is commenting on minor wording issues; i want this proposal to be passed, NOW, not to continue some more years with some more versions of the draft. I think this can be dealt with in a follow-up proposal if really needed in this case. The main points are fine.
thanks for pointing out *that* aspect, I am with you. My proposal was more along the lines of - if we have to touch it again, anyway,...
(BTW: This is not a personal issue, i have all my IPv6 Allocations already :-) I just want to get this done for the sake of IPv6 distribution since we're discussing about that for ages now!)
Same here :-) Wilfried.