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 ]
Stream Service
info at streamservice.nl
Tue Feb 10 10:54:06 CET 2009
Hello Andries, It is just a method to reduce the use of IPv6 PI space with IPv6. If an organization that has IPv6 PI space becomes a LIR they would need to number everything for as far as I can see. KPN could use one of the companies inside the holding to get PI space for as far as I can see, but would KPN need PI space? With kind regards, Mark Scholten Stream Service www.streamservice.nl -----Original Message----- From: address-policy-wg-admin at ripe.net [mailto:address-policy-wg-admin at ripe.net] On Behalf Of IP-Office KPN Sent: dinsdag 10 februari 2009 9:12 To: address-policy-wg at ripe.net Subject: RE: [address-policy-wg] 2006-01 New Draft Document Published (Provider Independent (PI) IPv6 Assignments for End User Organisations) 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' ________________________________________________________________________ ______________
- 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 ]