[address-policy-wg] RE: [policy-announce] 2009-06 New Policy Proposal (Removing Routing Requirements from the IPv6 Address Allocation Policy)

Frederic wrote:
> we do not support this proposal and  we would garant routing for min
> ipv6-PI block assignement.

RIPE NCC cannot guarantee anything regarding routing. You need to
communicate with the rest of the parties where you want your prefix to
go if they want to accept it or not.

Please see:
http://www.ripe.net/ripe/docs/ipv6-policies.html#routability
(see section 4.2. Routability Not Guaranteed in RIPE-466)
As mentioned in the text of the proposal.


Clearly there is a lot of confusion about this, thus, as I mentioned in
my other mail, the text can be amended by removing those statements, but
then there should definitely be a clear link to the above document.

Greets,
 Jeroen

-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 187 bytes
Desc: OpenPGP digital signature
URL: </ripe/mail/archives/address-policy-wg/attachments/20090527/53e3bf3b/attachment.sig>