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] 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 14:04:26 CET 2009
Hello Gert, What would be the minimum delay if there is an extra discussion/review phase? If I am correct RIPE will give an extra IPv6 PA assignment on request, could this also be an option? With kind regards, Mark Scholten Stream Service www.streamservice.nl Hosting: nl.php.net grisham.freenode.net and many others -----Original Message----- From: address-policy-wg-admin at ripe.net [mailto:address-policy-wg-admin at ripe.net] On Behalf Of Gert Doering Sent: dinsdag 10 februari 2009 13:47 To: Andy Davidson Cc: Eliot Lear; 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) Hi, On Tue, Feb 10, 2009 at 12:29:50PM +0000, Andy Davidson wrote: > Examples might be organisations who make assignments to end users, and > run anycast dns services. Bad example, as this is what we have the anycast DNS assignment policy for (which is currently being worked on to cover cases missing in the first version). But I can see your point - there might be cases where, for whatever reason, a LIR might want to assign a separate network to itself, and indeed this is not currently covered by 2006-01. What you ("you" as in "the community") now need to make up your mind about is: - do you want to accept 2006-01 as it is right now, in version 5.0, and make amendments for the "LIR to itself" special case later on (to go forward, I hear people are really waiting for it). - do you want to adapt 2006-01, which means "at least one extra round of discussion/review phase". (I'm a bit sorry to see this come up now, in the review phase, after we had very strong support to go ahead with *what we have* in the previous discussion phase) Gert Doering -- APWG chair -- Total number of prefixes smaller than registry allocations: 128645 SpaceNet AG Vorstand: Sebastian v. Bomhard Joseph-Dollinger-Bogen 14 Aufsichtsratsvors.: A. Grundner-Culemann D-80807 Muenchen HRB: 136055 (AG Muenchen) Tel: +49 (89) 32356-444 USt-IdNr.: DE813185279
- 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 ]