<html><head></head><body><div style="font-family:times new roman, new york, times, serif;font-size:13px;"><div style="font-family:times new roman, new york, times, serif;font-size:13px;"><div id="ydp54fdc099yiv4895519581"><div><div style="font-family:times new roman, new york, times, serif;font-size:13px;"><div><div><font size="5">Dear Jordi,<br><br></font></div><div><font size="5">I will like to join Moonesamy in appreciating your proposal for an update to the current IPV6 Policy.<br></font><div><font size="5">The proposed update indeed makes the policy clearer and has removed some of the ambiguity contained in the current version.<br></font><div><font size="5"><br></font><div><font size="5"><span>On the concern raised on...... "End sites or users must be assigned a
prefix that is a multiple of "n" /64’s which must be enough to meet
their current and planned needs" ......being for small service providers, I am of the opinion that the size of the administrative organization does not matter as long as they can justify their <b>Current and Planned</b> need.<br></span><span></span></font><div><font size="5"><br></font><div><font size="5">Regards<br>Aleruchi Chuku</font><br></div></div></div></div></div></div></div></div></div></div></div></div></body></html>