[GLOBAL-V6]ipv6 allocation policy question

To: ipv6-wg@ripe.net, global-v6@lists.apnic.net
Subject: [GLOBAL-V6]ipv6 allocation policy question
From: Andrius Kasparavicius <andrius@andrius.org>
Date: Thu, 12 Dec 2002 23:01:13 +0200
List-archive: <http://www.apnic.net/mailing-lists/global-v6/>
List-help: <mailto:global-v6-request@lists.apnic.net?subject=help>
List-id: Discussion of new global IPv6 policy development <global-v6.lists.apnic.net>
List-post: <mailto:global-v6@lists.apnic.net>
List-subscribe: <http://mailman.apnic.net/mailman/listinfo/global-v6>,<mailto:global-v6-request@lists.apnic.net?subject=subscribe>
List-unsubscribe: <http://mailman.apnic.net/mailman/listinfo/global-v6>,<mailto:global-v6-request@lists.apnic.net?subject=unsubscribe>
Sender: global-v6-admin@lists.apnic.net
User-agent: Mutt/1.4i

Hello, I am thinking about IPv6 allocation scheme and I actually do not
really understand what mean "allocating more tan one /48 for large
subscribers only". There I should calculate HD-Ratio? For example RIPE
NCC(for internal use i think) has /42? What it mean? Maybe it is just 
looking to make good hiararchy in future? Or what?

Should I, making /48 allocation to average subscriber, reserve next one or two
blocks looking to the future's better hiararchy?

Tell your opinion or strict policy.

best regards,
Andrius

Next by Date: [GLOBAL-V6]Global IPv6 Summit in China
Next by thread: [GLOBAL-V6]Global IPv6 Summit in China
Index(es):
- Date
- Thread