[address-policy-wg] Re: [policy-announce] 2006-02 New Policy Proposal (IPv6 Address Allocation and Assignment Policy)

Oh I could do that. But then... What the hell are policies for anyway! That's the scope of this thread really. Policies are, or should be, a good thing. Otherwise they are just a bad joke. Is that what RIRs want? Fine.

Stefan 

> -----Original Message-----
> From: address-policy-wg-admin at ripe.net 
> [mailto:address-policy-wg-admin at ripe.net] On Behalf Of 
> Michael.Dillon at btradianz.com
> Sent: Il-Ħamis, 15 ta' Ġunju 2006 12:32
> To: address-policy-wg at ripe.net
> Subject: RE: [address-policy-wg] Re: [policy-announce] 
> 2006-02 New Policy Proposal (IPv6 Address Allocation and 
> Assignment Policy)
> 
> > That is why trying to put a 'marketing' plan TODAY for 200 /48's 
> > within 2 years is kidding ourselves.
> 
> No, it's kidding RIPE. And since that is exactly what RIPE 
> asked for in their policy, go do it, get your IPv6 
> allocation, and quit complaining about your inability to 
> write an accurate plan. The policy document does not specify 
> that your plan will be checked for accuracy after 2 years.
> 
> Still, I don't see why there needs to be any limits at all or 
> any specific numbers in a plan.
> If someone wants to become an IPv6 LIR, just give them a /32 
> with no questions asked. RIPE should only need to scrutinize 
> requests for shorter prefixes.
> 
> --Michael Dillon
>