[address-policy-wg] IPv6 PI assignment policy

Hi Vladimir,

in that manner they would not be independent from us as organization.
If anything happens to us they would lose their subnet which has been 
allocated by us.

I forgot one tought in my first mail.
To be particular about the policy in my opinion guest networks provided 
by PI assigment holders e.g. companies aren't legitimate use either.
Because addresses are leased to users/devices which don't belong the 
company holding the PI assignment.
That addresses could be treated as assignments to third parties as well.

Regards
Thomas

Am 19.06.2015 14:24, schrieb Vladimir Andreev:
> 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
>
>