Hello Muhammad,
I believe there has been some misunderstanding here. As I've mentioned (as is also in current policy), the minimum assignment is a /48. Members are not restricted from requesting shorter delegations, so long as the request can be justified.
I do not see any reason to provide this applicant/APNIC member with a /48 IPv6 address block, which would complicate their implementation and may make it challenging or impossible to control the download path.
I disagree. Regardless of whether a network is single-site or multi-site multihomed, a network can request a delegation shorter than a /48, subject to justification. If a network requests (as an example) a /44 under current policy and the Secretariat accepts the justification, they will then receive the /44. There are mechanisms for networks to engineer traffic other than advertising shorter/longer prefixes.
there is no question that the applicant requires a prefix shorter than a /48
What happens if a member only wants a /48? They shouldn't be required to take a shorter delegation if they do not have a need for it.
Whilst I can appreciate that the intent of this policy is to simplify the ability for network operators to engineer traffic by advertising a shorter prefix to one and a longer prefix to another, there are other mechanisms that can be implemented which achieve the same result.
Regards,
Christopher Hawker
_______________________________________________ SIG-policy - https://mailman.apnic.net/[email protected]/ To unsubscribe send an email to [email protected]
