[address-policy-wg] 2013-06 New Policy Proposal (PA/PI Unification IPv6 Address Space)

Hi,

On 9/30/13 7:00 PM, Tore Anderson wrote:
> * Nick Hilliard
>
>> On 30/09/2013 17:41, Tore Anderson wrote:
>>> Then you would have only one path and no confusion:
>>>
>>> RIR[RIPE NCC] -> LIR -> End User
>>
>> you would have confusion about who the address space holder was and what
>> the end user's rights and obligations were to the ripe ncc.  If you're
>> going to suggest this, talk to the RIPE NCC legal eagles because it's a
>> difficult area.
>
> All existing PI holders would become simultaneously both the LIR *and*
> the End User in the above chain, so I'm not sure where this confusion
> would come from?
>

sorry, what? I'm confused :-)

> It would essential be the same as if a current LIR assigns its entire
> allocation to itself (its own infrastructure) and has no external End
> Users. I have a feeling this already happens a quite a bit in IPv4 these
> days...

Note that assignments will no longer exist under the proposed policy.
Additionally, I don't really understand the comparison in the context of 
the question.

Just having one path means that only the LIR will receive address space 
from the RIPE NCC and they can do whatever they want (provided they 
follow the policy) with that address space. It removes the independence 
of the current PI holder status.

Anyway, I do not think this is the right way to go forward and this 
proposal would dramatically change the whole policy which is not what we 
really aim for. Enough drama with the removal of PI and assignments :-)

my 2 cents

elvis