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

Dear Nick,

Please see RIPE NCC Registration Services' answer to your questions  
ragarding
proposal 2006-01 below:

> More generally, if Organisation X already holds IPv6 space, whether  
> PA or
> PI, and where:
>
> 1. they are not using the entire address block for their  
> infrastructural needs,
> 2. they intend to organise an event which requires a separate IPv6  
> address
> block for routing purposes,
> 3. the total number of /64s required for both their normal  
> infrastructural
> needs and their event requirements does not exceed their existing ipv6
> assignment
> 4. that assignment is either for a once-off or a periodically  
> recurring meeting
>
> then in this situation, would the RIPE NCC registration department  
> be happy
> to assign an ipv6 address block for that purpose?  My take on this is
> probably not. But it would be helpful to get a formal opinion from  
> this
> from the RIPE NCC.

The current version of proposal 2006-01 contains the provisions for  
assigning
more than a single /48 to an organisation:

> Additional assignments may also be made when there is a technical  
> need demanding
> this or usage justified. When possible, these further assignments  
> will be made
> from an adjacent address block.

Only very large networks would qualify for multiple /48 subnets under  
the "usage
justified" provision. However, networks that have multiple unconnected  
end-sites
and intend to originate the prefixes from different ASNs could qualify  
under
the "technical need" criterion.

So an organisation that has received a prefix for its infrastructure  
could
still qualify for an additional assignment for organising a meeting,  
although
this would depend on the details of their network setup.

In the specific case of the RIPE NCC organising the RIPE meeting, the  
issue of
the contractual relationship would have to be resolved first.

Best regards,

Alex Le Heux
RIPE NCC Policy Implementation Co-ordinator