Hi, On Fri, May 10, 2002 at 03:44:28PM +0200, Peter B . Juul wrote:
On Fri, May 10, 2002 at 04:39:33PM -0200, Yucel Guven wrote:
I also aggre with Peter and suggest attendees of RIPE-42 meeting to discuss about this requirement/demand.
Ah, sorry, no, the RIPE-42 ended on may 3rd. I was just asking if this had been discussed, as I'd heard from other sources it would be. The minutes are sometimes a while in the making (sorry, David) so I just wanted to see if someone could give a short reply on that specific point.
That specific point is history. There was consensus that the outstanding new "Global IPv6 interim policy draft" (that was posted just a few weeks ago in a revised edition) was to be made new policy. Wether that helps you depends on your network - criteria for getting IPv6 allocations boil down to "you must be willing to assign IPv6 networks to a substantial number of third party sites". If you're assigning to research institutes, universities, and so on, the criteria should be easily met. If you want addresses only for your own transport/server infrastructure, the new policy will not get you public space for that. You could use upstream space (recommended), or 6bone space (maybe not so good an idea). Gert Doering -- NetMaster -- Total number of prefixes smaller than registry allocations: 45077 (47584) SpaceNet AG Mail: netmaster@Space.Net Joseph-Dollinger-Bogen 14 Tel : +49-89-32356-0 80807 Muenchen Fax : +49-89-32356-299