Paula, These are our comments on the "IPv6 Assignment and Allocation Policy Document". Ronald van der Pol SURFnet 4.1.1: ====== It says: "The requesting organization must show that it already has issued IPv4 address space to 100 customer sites that can meet the criteria for a /48 IPv6 reassignment, and" What are "the criteria for a /48 IPv6 reassignment"? 4.1.1 (who gets sub-TLA?): ========================== It seems that the number of SLA customers is not a good discriminator to decide whether an ISP should be allocated a sub-TLA or not. Maybe the number of peerings to other default-free zones (e.g. more than 10) is a better discriminator. The issue is transit service and not end customer service. Maybe Europe and the USA should be treated differently. Their scales are quite different. Maybe the ARIN and RIPE rules should differ with respect to the exact number of peerings. RIPE might use less than ARIN. The same probably holds for APNIC. 4.1.1, (bootstrapping): ======================= The bootstrapping rules prevent Internet exchanges from getting a sub-TLA, because they don't issue IPv4 address space to customer sites. Besides, most European Internet exchanges don't have 100 customers. 4.2.2: ====== "TLA Registries will not be permitted to assign static IPv6 addresses to dial-up customers." Why not? IPv6 addresses are not a scarce resource. There are many situations in which a static IP address is useful.