This archive is retained to ensure existing URLs remain functional. It will not contain any emails sent to this mailing list after July 1, 2024. For all messages, including those sent before and after this date, please visit the new location of the archive at https://mailman.ripe.net/archives/list/address-policy-wg@ripe.net/
[address-policy-wg] 2007-01 Draft Documents Published (Direct Internet Resource Assignments to End Users from the RIPE NCC)
- Previous message (by thread): [address-policy-wg] 2007-01 Draft Documents Published (Direct Internet Resource Assignments to End Users from the RIPE NCC)
- Next message (by thread): [address-policy-wg] Proposal 2006-05 minimum /24 allocation
Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
Sascha Lenz
slz at baycix.de
Sun Mar 9 16:09:33 CET 2008
Hi, Filiz Yilmaz schrieb: > PDP Number: 2007-01 > Direct Internet Resource Assignments to End Users from the RIPE NCC > > Dear Colleagues, > > The draft documents for the proposal described in 2007-01 have been > published. Please note that this is a new version of the proposal. > The impact analysis that was conducted for this proposal has also > been published. > > The proposal states that a contractual relationship between an End > User and a sponsoring Local Internet Registry (LIR) or the RIPE NCC > must be established before the End User receives Internet number > resources (Autonomous System (AS) Numbers, Provider Independent (PI) > IPv4 and IPv6 address space, Internet Exchange Point (IXP) and > anycasting assignments) directly from the RIPE NCC. It also states > that the text in the policy should mention more explicitly that PI > assignments cannot be sub-assigned. in short: - I still support a policy regarding End-Users needing a contractual relationship with RIPE or(!) an active(!) LIR - I support the retroactive nature. - I still have mixed feelings about supporting a 'non-complete policy'. Non-complete means, we still haven't seen a proposal for an actual contract, how it might look like and numbers (money) in it. But it's probably better that we seperate the policy & contractual things, indeed. Especially if theres the RIPE _OR_ LIR choice. ==> I can support this policy, with some minor reservations. . o O(and i hope i really noticed all the smallprint that comes with that policy change, after all, it's sunday afternoon here and i might have missed a problematic point :-) -- ======================================================================== = Sascha Lenz SLZ-RIPE slz at baycix.de = = Network Desgin & Operations = = BayCIX GmbH, Landshut * PGP public Key on demand * = ========================================================================
- Previous message (by thread): [address-policy-wg] 2007-01 Draft Documents Published (Direct Internet Resource Assignments to End Users from the RIPE NCC)
- Next message (by thread): [address-policy-wg] Proposal 2006-05 minimum /24 allocation
Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]