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] Re: [policy-announce] 2006-05 New Draft Document Published (PI Assignment Size)
- Previous message (by thread): [address-policy-wg] Re: [policy-announce] 2006-05 New Draft Document Published (PI Assignment Size)
- Next message (by thread): [address-policy-wg] getting second IPv6 PA as a LIR
Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
Marcin Kuczera
marcin at leon.pl
Tue Apr 26 23:40:48 CEST 2011
Erik Bais wrote: > Hi Nick, > >> On 01/02/2011 11:14, Erik Bais wrote: >>> I was wondering what the status is of this policy. > >> Hi Eric, > >> It's blocking on me to re-formulate and send back to the working group. >> Unfortunately, I'm just tied up with other stuff at the moment. I'm > hoping >> to get time to deal with this soon. > >> Nick > > I noticed that the policy is scheduled on the agenda for the next RIPE > meeting, but I didn't see anything change in status yet. > > Did anything change to its currently published form and how it is on the > RIPE website published ? > > If not, it is possible to get this phase concluded asap for the following > reasons : > > 1) We are about to shift the period of assignment for PI from 6 months to 3 > months. And by not having something like this in place, we'll end up with PI > space that is un-routable, as everyone (or at least a large portion of > ISP's) is filtering everything smaller than a /24. > 2) For LIR's, being able to do a PI request, without having to make up the > story upto the next /24, will make things a lot easier. > 3) For the IPRA's, reduction in workload as they don't have to shift through > all the made up stories on PI requests and actual legitimate PI requests. > > As some might say that this policy is out-dated due to the nearby IPv4 > depletion, it would be my statement that this is the moment why you would > want this and want this ASAP for the above mentioned reasons. > > In short, can we move ahead with this and yes I do support this. :) Hello, I'am new here, from land of massive PI requests ;) We are LIR providing SponsorLIR service for little ISPs in Poland. Providing /24 as the smallest entity is a good idea in my opinion, however because little ISPs "wake up" recently willing to replace their i.e. /22 PA to PI (to be multihomed and independent) I hope that getting more than /24 will still be possible - of course if still available in RIR resources. Regards, Marcin >> You can find the full proposal at: > >> http://ripe.net/ripe/policies/proposals/2006-05.html > >> and the draft document at: > >> http://ripe.net/ripe/draft-documents/ripe-492-draft2006-05.html > > Regards, > Erik Bais > >
- Previous message (by thread): [address-policy-wg] Re: [policy-announce] 2006-05 New Draft Document Published (PI Assignment Size)
- Next message (by thread): [address-policy-wg] getting second IPv6 PA as a LIR
Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]