Hi Mathew, >> I'll note that both authors' LIRs (uk.mod and de.kaufland) already hold >> an IPv6 /29 allocation each...so assuming the proposal was intended to >> help scratch an itch of their own, so to speak, perhaps this is >> simply an omission? > > It was our (uk.mod's) expectation/assumption that it would be possible to > return an existing allocation (in an 'unused/as-new' state) and apply for > another under the new criteria.
That is correct. If you return your allocation you can then do a new first-allocation request. With the current text it won't be possible to grow an existing allocation though, as that would use the rules for additional allocations. Cheers, Sander
