Am Fri, 9 Nov 2012 13:49:51 +0100 schrieb Gert Doering <gert@space.net>: ...
Actually, I think the IPRAs are reading something in there that has not been the intention by the WG (and it should be obvious from the discussions that it wasn't, because the case "what about a LIR that has more than one /32?" was never discussed)
For non-native speakers (like me), the sentence above is perfectly fine to be interpreted as "... extensions of *any of these* allocations up to a total of /29..." and not "... up to a total of a /29 across all IPv6 stock the LIR has".
From an old programmers paradigm "be liberate on what you receive and strict what you send" I would interpret the policy like the NCC (to be on the safe side). Under business and policy aspects, your reasoning absolutely makes sense to me. +1 for your suggestion. Andreas -- Andreas Schachtner afs Holding GmbH communication technologies & solutions http://afs-com.de/ Geschaeftsfuehrer Andreas Schachtner HRB 15448, Amtsgericht Dortmund