[members-discuss] [EXTERNAL] Re: New Charging Scheme

On 19/02/2019 12:44, Patterson, Richard (Sky Network Services (SNS)) wrote:
> We're perhaps a less common case with a greenfield deployment, large
> IPv6-only focused deployment from day one, large scale forecasts and
> proven track record.   We did get there in end, but it was a rather
> frustrating process with lots of back and forth emails via a
> ticketing system, conference calls, challenging and requests for
> commercially sensitive information around forecasts and topology
> deployments (without RIPE being willing to sign NDAs).   I was very
> close to giving up and designing around /56 PDs for customers instead
> of /48s.

This shouldn't be the experience you get if you are enthusiastic about 
deploying IPv6 to end customers. This is just plain wrong.

I understand that if we stick strictly to the policy this can be 
interpreted as a valid process, but I still think this shouldn't be the 
default in such cases.

> 
> It felt like the IPv4-conservative approach was being applied to
> IPv6, and that kind of defeats the purpose IMO.

Agreed 100%.

Cheers, Jan