[address-policy-wg] getting second IPv6 PA as a LIR

Hi

On Mon, May 02, 2011 at 08:37:35PM +0200, Marcin Kuczera wrote:
> And I understand, that i.e. /64 for subscribers network is something 
> that in IPv4 PI world would be forbidden (i.e. /29).
> If all of us agree, that there is enough address space for every 
> toothbrush, subscribers can get something between /48 an /64 and this is 
> will be usual, and even in IPv6 PA space there will be no every subnet 
> registration (as I understand, and as it is requiured for IPv4 PA) 

Mostly, yes.

> - why IPv6 PI can not be similar to IPv6 PA then ???

This is pretty much what we're going to propose in Thursday's APWG session,
reorganize the whole PA/PI structure, possibly completely doing away with the
distinction.

I'm going to bring up some background info, and then we'll go into the
discussion what *the working group* thinks the goal should be - and then
we'll take it to the formal policy process to put the ideas in writing.

Planned time frame: Thursday, 11:00-12:00, main room (and webcast, of course)

Gert Doering
        -- APWG chair
-- 
did you enable IPv6 on something today...?

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
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 306 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: </ripe/mail/archives/address-policy-wg/attachments/20110503/4d65f490/attachment.sig>