[address-policy-wg] [Ext] Re: proposal to remove IPv6 PI

Sascha Luck [ml] wrote:

[...]

> I think it would actually simplify a lot of those issues. 
> It doesn't remove the RIR->LIR->End User hierarchy 
> but it removes the requirement that a LIR provide
> connectivity to an End User.

Since when has this been a requirement?

Section 2.4 of ripe-699 defines LIRs and describes them as "primarily"
providing addresses for network services that they provide. Have I
misunderstood the policy, or is there currently a requirement that LIR
provide network connectivity to the users of the addresses they assign or
sub-allocate?

Kind regards,

Leo Vegoda
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: smime.p7s
Type: application/pkcs7-signature
Size: 3739 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: </ripe/mail/archives/address-policy-wg/attachments/20180517/3a762e79/attachment.p7s>