[ipv6-wg] IPv6 Prefix delegation BCOP version 3 is out...

On 05/07/2017 10:11, Sander Steffann wrote:
> Hi Radu,
> 
>> You should be aware that ISPs do not start directly as big
>> companies. Some small local ISPs do not consider to be a good
>> "investment" to become LIR from day 0, so they don't. They start
>> with a small *assignment* (not very often a sub-allocation) from
>> the upstream provider
>> 
>> [...]
>> 
>> Weather this situation should be treated in the document - not
>> sure. However having a mention that this is not how things are
>> supposed to happen would be a good idea.
> 
> I think this would indeed be a good place to recommend against this,
> but maybe the other way around: "When providing address space to a
> smaller ISP you should give them a sub-allocation (not an assignment)
> that allows them to make properly sized (see the rest of this BCOP)
> assignments to their customers." or something like that.

+1.

I introduced this text into section 4.1.5 and here comes the BCOP draft
v.4 ;)

https://www.sinog.si/docs/draft-IPv6pd-BCOP-v4.pdf

Can you please all have a look if this document is now ready for
publication? We are receiving many requests for a stable document on
this topic - and we've been "babysitting" this one quite long enough.

So, my question is - should we publish it as a stable RIPE BCP document?

Cheers and thnx, Jan

-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: smime.p7s
Type: application/pkcs7-signature
Size: 3976 bytes
Desc: S/MIME Cryptographic Signature
URL: </ripe/mail/archives/ipv6-wg/attachments/20170726/f39e479c/attachment.p7s>