hi, we support this proposal. http://www.ripe.net/ripe/policies/proposals/2009-08.html bst regards. Frederic
Can I just ask for clarification of the following: "the LIR must demonstrate the unique routing requirements for the PI assignment." and "The LIR must return the IPv6 PI assignment within a period of six months should the unique routing requirements for the PI assignment no longer be met." 1. does this mean that the following question from RIPE-468 is no longer valid for routing? "% Is the End User requesting extra address space for routing and/or % administrative reasons? (Yes/No)" 2. Will this include the space not being routed at all? or does this require that the space be routed? Regards, Dave. ------------------------------------------------ David Freedman Group Network Engineering Claranet Limited http://www.clara.net -----Original Message----- From: address-policy-wg-admin@ripe.net on behalf of Frederic Sent: Mon 6/8/2009 20:07 To: address-policy-wg@ripe.net Subject: [address-policy-wg] 2009-08 hi, we support this proposal. http://www.ripe.net/ripe/policies/proposals/2009-08.html bst regards. Frederic
Hi, David -- Thanks for your email. I am replying in capacity as author. On 8 Jun 2009, at 21:04, David Freedman wrote:
Can I just ask for clarification of the following:
"the LIR must demonstrate the unique routing requirements for the PI assignment." and "The LIR must return the IPv6 PI assignment within a period of six months should the unique routing requirements for the PI assignment no longer be met."
1. does this mean that the following question from RIPE-468 is no longer valid for routing? "% Is the End User requesting extra address space for routing and/or % administrative reasons? (Yes/No)"
In my opinion it does not end the validity of this question, because - PI applications will come from non-LIRs as well as LIRs, where the policy is NOT changing. - PI applications from LIRs need to have 'yes' selected here.
2. Will this include the space not being routed at all? or does this require that the space be routed?
If your PA is routed on the internet, and your need some PI which will not be routed on the internet, then in my opinion there are two different routing policies for these subnets. Kind regards, Andy
Because of point 2 I don't support this proposal, if/when this point is removed I support this proposal. Some people don't want that RIPE is saying anything about routing policy, so it should also not look for this for returning IPv6/IPv4 IP assignments if you ask me. From: address-policy-wg-admin@ripe.net [mailto:address-policy-wg-admin@ripe.net] On Behalf Of David Freedman Sent: maandag 8 juni 2009 22:05 To: address-policy-wg@ripe.net Subject: RE: [address-policy-wg] 2009-08 Can I just ask for clarification of the following: "the LIR must demonstrate the unique routing requirements for the PI assignment." and "The LIR must return the IPv6 PI assignment within a period of six months should the unique routing requirements for the PI assignment no longer be met." 1. does this mean that the following question from RIPE-468 is no longer valid for routing? "% Is the End User requesting extra address space for routing and/or % administrative reasons? (Yes/No)" 2. Will this include the space not being routed at all? or does this require that the space be routed? Regards, Dave. ------------------------------------------------ David Freedman Group Network Engineering Claranet Limited http://www.clara.net -----Original Message----- From: address-policy-wg-admin@ripe.net on behalf of Frederic Sent: Mon 6/8/2009 20:07 To: address-policy-wg@ripe.net Subject: [address-policy-wg] 2009-08 hi, we support this proposal. http://www.ripe.net/ripe/policies/proposals/2009-08.html bst regards. Frederic
participants (4)
-
Andy Davidson -
David Freedman -
Frederic -
Stream Service