[ipv6-wg] Re: [address-policy-wg] 2010-06 New Policy Proposal (Registration Requirements for IPv6 End User Assignments)

On Sep 10, 2010, at 11:42 AM, Bertrand Yvain wrote:

> On Fri, Sep 10, 2010 at 09:44:18AM +0200, Marco Hogewoning wrote:
>> How do people feel about AGGREGATED-BY-LIR ? Stays in line with the
>> current ones and describes the purpose.
> 
> I don't really appreciate the "BY-LIR" thing as there is no requirement
> (that I know of) for the object to be maintained by a LIR.  Section 4.0
> of the draft confirms this stating that such a block can be a one level
> more specific of an ASSIGNED inet6num.
> 
> The main idea of the draft is that assignation details are maintained
> out of the RIPE database.
> 
> I would favor things like:
> 
> - ASSIGNED-EXTERNAL
> - ASSIGNED-AGGREGATED
> - AGGREGATED-BY-ORG
> 
> But none of them is really good.

Regarding the LIR part, as you can't make assignments from a PI block it will always be PA and therefor LIR (or SUB-ALLOCATED).

Marco