[address-policy-wg] 2009-08 Last Call for Comments (IPv6 Provider Independent (PI) Assignments for LIRs)

All,

I support the general idea of the proposal, but I have some questions:

The proposal states that (last paragraph):
"If an organisation already received a PI assignment before becoming an
LIR, the PI assignment should be returned upon receiving an IPv6
allocation if there are no specific routing requirements to justify
both."

First question:
Only in this last paragraph of the proposal there is mention of "PI
assignment" as opposed to "IPv6 assignment". Was this done
intentionally?

Second question:
Is it (therefore) not possible to become a LIR and just keep the PI
assignment instead of asking for a IPv6 PA allocation? 
I can imagine that if an organisation doesn't want to have Independent
Assignment Request and Maintenance Agreements with LIRs, instead of
entering into a End User Assignment Agreement with RIPE, the
organisation wishes to become a LIR (same costs, more service) while
wanting to keep the previously assigned PI space (and public AS number).

Third question:
Also, (just to be sure) as this Policy document exclusively deals with
IPv6, does this policy proposal also have impact on the IPv4 PI space an
organisation already has when it wants to become an LIR?


With kind regards,


Andries Hettema
nl.kpn-bbt

IP-Office KPN Internet
070 45 13398
ip-office at kpn.com