[address-policy-wg] New correct proposal (Was: 2008-01/2008-02)

michael.dillon at bt.com wrote:
[..]
> Here is my wish list for IPv6 PI:
> 
> - No PI assignments via LIRs. LIRs only manage PA IPv6.
> - special membership in RIPE with an annual fee for PI holders
> - contract signed between RIPE and PI holders that covers fee
>   payments, and revocation/return of address blocks
> - special known superblock from which all PI allocations are made
>   so that people can manage their filters
> - /48 minimum PI allocation but larger aggregate is also possible
> - contact every IPv4 PI holder by email and inform them of the 
>   new rules for IPv6 PI allocations
> 
> In my opinion that should be followed by another policy change
> which requires RIPE membership, annual fee payment and a signed
> contract for any future ASN assignments or IPv4 PI address blocks.

Now *THAT* is a solid policy proposal that I would be willing to support.

The 2008-01/2008-02 though should be binned directly and should have 
never seen daylight in the first place. (though it is good to again 
start discussions of course :)

Greets,
  Jeroen

-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 187 bytes
Desc: OpenPGP digital signature
URL: </ripe/mail/archives/address-policy-wg/attachments/20080116/5d1461b0/attachment.sig>