This archive is retained to ensure existing URLs remain functional. It will not contain any emails sent to this mailing list after July 1, 2024. For all messages, including those sent before and after this date, please visit the new location of the archive at https://mailman.ripe.net/archives/list/[email protected]/
[ipv6-wg] Re: Re: Re: [address-policy-wg] Re: Andre's guide to fix IPv6
- Previous message (by thread): [ipv6-wg] Re: Re: [address-policy-wg] Re: Andre's guide to fix IPv6
- Next message (by thread): [ipv6-wg] Re: Re: Re: [address-policy-wg] Re: Andre's guide to fix IPv6
Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
Daniel Roesen
dr at cluenet.de
Fri Dec 2 14:32:36 CET 2005
On Thu, Dec 01, 2005 at 09:05:57PM +0100, Elmar K. Bins wrote: > That's the independently-networking end-user problem we have. [...] > Removal of the 200 customer rule would solve that. One-block-per-LIR > would solve that. No, it wouldn't. IPv6 allocation policy excludes end-sites, no matter wether they are LIR or not. DENIC is clearly an end site. At least I'm not aware that it's in the business of providing Internet connectivity to other entities. Currently, it's not even enough to throw money at the problem (pay LIR fees for not being a LIR but getting IP space), you also have to be sufficiently large to claim being an enterprise-internal ISP. Then again, even some school in Switzerland and one/three-man living room consulting companies manage that, surprisingly. Regards, Daniel -- CLUE-RIPE -- Jabber: dr at cluenet.de -- dr at IRCnet -- PGP: 0xA85C8AA0
- Previous message (by thread): [ipv6-wg] Re: Re: [address-policy-wg] Re: Andre's guide to fix IPv6
- Next message (by thread): [ipv6-wg] Re: Re: Re: [address-policy-wg] Re: Andre's guide to fix IPv6
Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
[ ipv6-wg Archives ]