On Thu, 24 Oct 2002, Gert Doering wrote:
On Thu, Oct 24, 2002 at 10:27:07AM +0300, Pekka Savola wrote:
On Thu, 24 Oct 2002, Gert Doering wrote:
On Thu, Oct 24, 2002 at 09:24:13AM +0300, Pekka Savola wrote:
I wonder what interpretation of "other organizations" is used when RIPE NCC evaluates the applications..?
I always understood it to be "a different legal entity".
Using 200 employees for that sounds a bit borderline to me, though.
Right.. Employees, as any other people, different legal entities, though...
Yes, of course. It's valid to the letter of the policy, but it's not really in the spirit of it. The idea was to catch "companies that manage IP allocations for third parties as part of their core business" (to avoid the term "ISP").
A company with 200 employees - and a university with 10.000 students - are interesting problems, though. Shall each "home site" get a /48? Or is it "one /48 for the whole company/university, and each home site only gets a /64"? I can't answer that.
The "one /48 fits all" policy sucks.
Perhaps I'd better forward this discussion on the global-v6 policy list. It seems clear to me that 200 employees are inadequate.. but I believe "internal organizations" is not in the spirit either. -- Pekka Savola "Tell me of difficulties surmounted, Netcore Oy not those you stumble over and fall" Systems. Networks. Security. -- Robert Jordan: A Crown of Swords