[address-policy-wg] IPv6 PI assignment policy

One fix:

Not "inetnum" and "route" but "inet6num" and "route6".

19.06.2015, 15:23, "Vladimir Andreev" <vladimir at quick-soft.net>:
> Another way:
>
> 1) Create "inetnum" with type ALLOCATED-BY-LIR inside of "inetnum" allocated by RIPE NCC to LIR;
> 2) Create "route" object with the same IP prefix as in step 1 and desired AS;
> 3) Announce your prefix;
>
> Also you may need to create at least one ASSIGNED "inetnum" inside ALLOCATED-BY-LIR "inetnum".
>
> 19.06.2015, 15:15, "Christopher Kunz" <chrislist at de-punkt.de>:
>>   Am 19.06.15 um 14:06 schrieb Vladimir Andreev:
>>>    Hello!
>>>
>>>    Why wouldn't they become a LIR?
>>
>>>>    Small Hotspot providers and especially Freifunk communities typically
>>>>    can not afford a LIR Membership to be independent. In my opinion the
>>>>    current policy makes it hard to adopt IPv6 in such cases.
>>
>>   As the OP wrote: It's too expensive for a non-profit communal
>>   organisation (typically made up of 3-10 enthusiastic community members
>>   without a real budget) to become a LIR just for the purpose of
>>   connecting one (!) city's Wifi to the world.
>>
>>   --ck
>
> --
> With best regards, Vladimir Andreev
> General director, QuickSoft LLC
> Tel: +7 903 1750503

-- 
With best regards, Vladimir Andreev
General director, QuickSoft LLC
Tel: +7 903 1750503