[address-policy-wg] proposal to remove IPv6 PI

Hi Gert,

This sounds strange to me, specially the "laws" bit.

Unless I'm wrong on this, the other RIRs don't have that "special end-user contract", the membership agreement is the same, and never heard about a single case which it was a trouble at all.

Having somebody that do the paperwork for becoming an LIR and any associated work, is something that is being done already today for many companies, so I don't think there is no reason for that being a showstopper. In fact, this is something very common in many business activities (and just for our sector).

Last, but not least, we could keep the "end-user" agreement if this is a real problem, but still unify PI and PA.

Basically the policy text will say "If you have a need for end-site addressing, such as /48, you will get it *allocated* under the end-user agreement. If you have a need for /32 ... etc ... you will get it *allocated* under the LIR agreement".

I think the point that need to be clear is that by removing IPv6 PI, my intent is not to create troubles to anyone, but on the other way around, to simplify and to avoid complex policy text that disallows (because it is assigment instead of allocation), things that *allocations* allows ... which create artificial barriers and bending the rules or their interpretation.

Regards,
Jordi
 
 

-----Mensaje original-----
De: address-policy-wg <address-policy-wg-bounces at ripe.net> en nombre de Gert Doering <gert at space.net>
Fecha: sábado, 19 de mayo de 2018, 12:17
Para: JORDI PALET MARTINEZ <jordi.palet at consulintel.es>
CC: <address-policy-wg at ripe.net>
Asunto: Re: [address-policy-wg] proposal to remove IPv6 PI

    Hi,
    
    On Sat, May 19, 2018 at 12:07:50PM +0200, JORDI PALET MARTINEZ via address-policy-wg wrote:
    > My proposal is NOT to stop IPv6 PI, it is only to make a *single*
    > category of LIRs for both that accommodate real IPv6 addressing
    > size needs, because PI and PA are the same, it is just an artificial
    > name.
    
    Speaking for my PI-holding (IPv4 and IPv6) customers, most of them do
    not *want* to be a LIR.  They have a nice contract with a local company
    (us) that does all the paperwork for them, speaks their local language,
    they can visit our office if needed, we handle the international money
    transfer bit, etc.
    
    Some *cannot* become a LIR due to governing laws that disallow them 
    to join any sort of association.
    
    So "doing away with end-users that have their own space and are not 
    a RIPE member" is not going to fly.
    
    Gert Doering
            -- speaking as sponsoring LIR admin
    -- 
    have you enabled IPv6 on something today...?
    
    SpaceNet AG                      Vorstand: Sebastian v. Bomhard, Michael Emmer
    Joseph-Dollinger-Bogen 14        Aufsichtsratsvors.: A. Grundner-Culemann
    D-80807 Muenchen                 HRB: 136055 (AG Muenchen)
    Tel: +49 (0)89/32356-444         USt-IdNr.: DE813185279
    



**********************************************
IPv4 is over
Are you ready for the new Internet ?
http://www.consulintel.es
The IPv6 Company

This electronic message contains information which may be privileged or confidential. The information is intended to be for the exclusive use of the individual(s) named above and further non-explicilty authorized disclosure, copying, distribution or use of the contents of this information, even if partially, including attached files, is strictly prohibited and will be considered a criminal offense. If you are not the intended recipient be aware that any disclosure, copying, distribution or use of the contents of this information, even if partially, including attached files, is strictly prohibited, will be considered a criminal offense, so you must reply to the original sender to inform about this communication and delete it.