Hi, On Tue, Apr 08, 2008 at 03:35:53PM +0200, Frederic wrote:
That's a different policy proposal than this one (2007-01). IPv6 PI assignments are proposed in 2006-01 and 2008-01.
i know, i know ;)
2007-1 is to determine : proposal states that a contractual relationship between an End User and a sponsoring LIR or the RIPE NCC must be established before the End User receives Internet number resources
Exactly.
contractual relationship will be made with Fees. we cannot occult this. (the amount is not the fact of proposal).
This is also true.
Today i have choice, i have a relationship with my LIR (contractual or not) i ask AS and PI (is it justify regarding RIPE condition) and i have it. i do not need to have contractual relationship.
Today, you already need a contractual relationship with someone to get the AS and IPv4 PI space routed for you. So having another contract that basically specifies "if I cease to exist, my AS and PI fall back to the RIPE NCC" is not *that* much more effort. Given the past discussions about 2006-01, there will *not* be IPv6 PI space without a clear contractual relationship. So you need to decide what you want: do you want IPv6 PI? In that case, please really consider whether 2007-01 so bad that you can never ever accept it - because if 2007-01 is not accepted, there will NOT be IPv6 PI any time soon.
we do not support: because we want keep the free of the choice. and the
With 2007-01, you *do* have the choice - you can use any LIR you want (if you change LIRs, just move your contract) - if all LIRs in your region are inacceptable, you can have a direct contract with the RIPE NCC. So you actually have *more* choice than today. Today, there is no way to do business directly with the RIPE NCC.
argument to said we have "dead compagny" and we need to know by a contractual relationship is not for us a good way, A procedure seems to be a good way... a procedure like domain name.
Domain names require a) a contract, and b) a yearly fee (at least for domains under most commercially relevant top-level domains). 2007-01 is actually modelled quite similar to the way the .DE TLD operates. Please re-read the discussions about 2006-01, and 2007-01, and think about what you *really* want - good for you, and good for the Internet as a whole. The end result will always be a compromise, because there is no way to make everybody happy at the same time - but we need to find a compromise that is better than what we currently have (which is *bad*). Gert Doering -- APWG chair -- Total number of prefixes smaller than registry allocations: 110584 SpaceNet AG Vorstand: Sebastian v. Bomhard Joseph-Dollinger-Bogen 14 Aufsichtsratsvors.: A. Grundner-Culemann D-80807 Muenchen HRB: 136055 (AG Muenchen) Tel: +49 (89) 32356-444 USt-IdNr.: DE813185279