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/[email protected]/
[address-policy-wg] 2006-01 New Draft Document Published (Provider Independent (PI) IPv6 Assignments for End User Organisations)
- Previous message (by thread): [address-policy-wg] 2006-01 New Draft Document Published (Provider Independent (PI) IPv6 Assignments for End User Organisations)
- Next message (by thread): [address-policy-wg] 2006-01 New Draft Document Published (Provider Independent (PI) IPv6 Assignments for End User Organisations)
Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
Eliot Lear
lear at cisco.com
Tue Feb 10 10:20:25 CET 2009
Isn't space allocated to an LIR PA by definition? Eliot On 2/10/09 9:12 AM, IP-Office KPN wrote: > All, > > I might have missed some of the discussion and emails - in that case my > sincere apologies -, but I couldn't find the answer in my archive, so > here's my question: > > >> To qualify for IPv6 PI address space, an organisation must: >> a) not be an LIR >> > > What is the rationale behind this? That LIRs do not need IPv6 PI address > space? > For as I read this, a LIR can never requeste for and receive an IPv6 PI > address space. Is this what is meant here? > > > With kind regards, > > > Andries Hettema > IP-Office KPN Internet > +31 70 45 13398 > ip-office at kpn.com > > > -----Original Message----- > From: address-policy-wg-admin at ripe.net > [mailto:address-policy-wg-admin at ripe.net] On Behalf Of Filiz Yilmaz > Sent: Monday, February 09, 2009 5:35 PM > To: policy-announce at ripe.net > Cc: address-policy-wg at ripe.net > Subject: [address-policy-wg] 2006-01 New Draft Document Published > (Provider Independent (PI) IPv6 Assignments for End User Organisations) > > PDP Number: 2006-01 > Provider Independent (PI) IPv6 Assignments for End User Organisations > > Dear Colleagues, > > The text of the policy proposal 2006-01 has been revised based on > the community feedback. We have published the new version (version > 5.0) today. The draft document for the proposal has also been published > as well as the impact analysis that was conducted for this proposal. > > You can find the full proposal at: > > http://www.ripe.net/ripe/policies/proposals/2006-01.html > > and the draft document at: > > > http://www.ripe.net/ripe/draft-documents/ripe-421-draft2006-01-v5.html > > We encourage you to read the draft document text and send any comments > to address-policy-wg at ripe.net before 9 March 2009. > > Regards > > Filiz Yilmaz > Policy Development Officer > RIPE NCC > > > ________________________________________________________________________ > ______________ > This inbound message to KPN has been checked for all known viruses by > KPN MailScan, > powered by MessageLabs. > For further information visit: http://www.kpn.com, keyword 'Mailscan' > ________________________________________________________________________ > ______________ > > > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: </ripe/mail/archives/address-policy-wg/attachments/20090210/40d4c08e/attachment.html>
- Previous message (by thread): [address-policy-wg] 2006-01 New Draft Document Published (Provider Independent (PI) IPv6 Assignments for End User Organisations)
- Next message (by thread): [address-policy-wg] 2006-01 New Draft Document Published (Provider Independent (PI) IPv6 Assignments for End User Organisations)
Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]