Hi, On Fri, Aug 29, 2003 at 02:00:03PM +0200, Hans Petter Holen wrote: [..]
Don't get me wrong. I'm talking about a special case here, respectively about detailed information as in "equipment specs, model number...ect." as well as stuff like "network plans".
I think the criteria to reveal your network plan has been there since RIPE 185 and even before that.
The network *plan*, yes, but that was mostly unspecific, like "this is the office network, 100 PCs", without having to prove more detail. [..]
I wonder if somebody can point me to when documenting the make, model and version became a generic requirement to get address space became part of the policy.
(Yes I know I have said in (private) conversations that IF this information is a requirement is part of the policy THEN it should be part of the form.)
I agree with you - if it is policy, then it has to be asked by the form. On the other hand, as for the IPv6 thing, I oppose asking for very fine details that are really not *that* relevant, except for cases that warrant an exception from the usual rules (like in the classful context that you've quoted). Gert Doering -- NetMaster -- Total number of prefixes smaller than registry allocations: 55575 (56535) SpaceNet AG Mail: netmaster@Space.Net Joseph-Dollinger-Bogen 14 Tel : +49-89-32356-0 80807 Muenchen Fax : +49-89-32356-299