[address-policy-wg] IPv6 assignment for the RIPE meetingnetwork

...

> Yeah and make sure the entity is registered outside of the NCC service  
> region so any conflict of interest can be avoided :)
> 
> No really, don't you think this goes a bit too far ? Like Gert already  
> posted, Remco made a suggestion which seems to be far and  
> straightforward and if we get stuck in the 'NCC can't sign with  
> themselves' I'm perfectly happy to have a chat with our sponsoring  
> dept and run the request via our LIR so there is no need for the NCC  
> to sign a direct enduser agreement.

I support such a pragmatic approach instead of forming new entities. You never 
get rid of those, you know :-)

	Andreas

-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 233 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: </ripe/mail/archives/address-policy-wg/attachments/20081203/e5ffef74/attachment.sig>