[address-policy-wg] 2011-02 New Policy Proposal (Removal of multihomed requirement for IPv6)

On Tue, 19 Apr 2011, Wilfried Woeber, UniVie/ACOnet wrote:

> There is no way to redistribute a "FIB-entry-surcharge" to whatever or 
> whoever believes to "suffer" from this proposed change in policy.

As I stated before, I don't care if they get the money in cash from the 
bank and BURN them at a BBQ, as long as the money is paid so as to stop 
people using it who don't really have any real business use for it.

I don't want the money, I just want there to be *substantial cost* to take 
up a DFZ slot.

Preferrably it should be paid per slot as well, so people de-aggregating 
their blocks have to pay more, but I don't know any way to do that.

-- 
Mikael Abrahamsson    email: swmike at swm.pp.se