[address-policy-wg] IPv6 PI resource question!

> From: address-policy-wg-admin at ripe.net
[mailto:address-policy-wg-admin at ripe.net] On Behalf Of Sander Steffann
> > Another option (but that isn't something for
> > this list I guess) is to have some LIR extra light account with just
> 1 IPv6
> > range and for more you need to become a normal LIR, an extra
> limitation
> > could be that it would be required that you've some IPv4 PI space.
> 
> This might be a valid option, but indeed not as something for this list
> but as something for the RIPE NCC GM.
> 
> I do get the impression here that the current policy (Get a /32 or
> larger PA for providing access service to customers, or get a /48 PI as
> a multi homed end-user) is not 'wrong', but that people have problems
> with the cost of running an LIR. If this is the case I am not sure if
> we should start changing the policy...

Hello Sander,

However as this isn't an option for this list (and I don't know if this idea
is something that people could agree on at the RIPE NCC GM) I think this
list should look for other options to "solve" this practical problem. That
could be changing a policy to make it easier to get IPv6 PI if you already
own IPv4 PI.

I'm happy to write down a proposal for the changes. However I'll vote
against it when it isn't accepted and the RIPE NCC GM did decide before that
moment to create some option for this problem that is cheaper (but possible
very limited, like only 1 IPv6 /48 range and for more you need a LIR account
like they currently exist).

Regards, Mark