[address-policy-wg] Provider Independent (PI) IPv6 Assignments for End User Organisations (2006-01)

On Wed, Sep 27, 2006 at 11:56:10AM +0200, JORDI PALET MARTINEZ wrote:
> Hi all,
> 
> Sorry confused stats. Ignore the previous email ...
> 
> As the discussion period for this proposal
> (http://www.ripe.net/ripe/policies/proposals/2006-01.html) is almost over, I
> will like to ask for the latest inputs in order to further decide how to
> proceed.
> 
> Filiz arranged some stats about the discussion (thanks a lot for that !)
> last July, and afterwards, even if the discussion period has been extended,
> I don't recall having seen new comments.
> 
> The stats don't include my own postings:
> 
> >>> - there were 9 posts from 8 individuals about it.
> >>> 
> >>> - 5 people supported it. 1 of these made some comments though, that he
> >>> prefers a longer prefix than a /32 clearly in his mail.
> >>> 
> >>> - 1 person stated he supports "PI" but he is not supporting this proposal.
> >>> 
> >>> - 2 people said "No".
> 
> So someone else will like to say anything new or clarify their view in favor
> or opposition to the proposal ?
I beleive most arguments have been spoken so I see
no reason to delve further into this discussion
but will instead promptly place my vote in favour
of this proposal.

Best regards,
   Kristian.

-- 
Kristian Larsson                                   KLL-RIPE
Network Engineer                      Net at Once [AS35706]
+46 704 910401			     kristian at spritelink.se