[address-policy-wg] 2008-01 New Policy Proposal (Assigning IPv6 PI to Every Inetnum Holder)
- Previous message (by thread): [address-policy-wg] 2008-01 New Policy Proposal (Assigning IPv6 PI to Every Inetnum Holder)
- Next message (by thread): [address-policy-wg] 2008-01 New Policy Proposal (Assigning IPv6 PI to Every Inetnum Holder)
Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
Marcin Gondek
drixter at e-utp.net
Wed Jan 16 12:26:41 CET 2008
michael.dillon at bt.com pisze: >> If the price will be higher, then everybody join to RIPE as >> LIR. And then we will have +1000% of LIRs. Do "we" need this? >> Now everybody is waiting for some kind of statesment or >> procedure from RIPE side. >> > > If the organizations which receive IPv6 PI allocations, join RIPE > and sign a contract and pay an annual fee, they would not be > LIRs (Local Internet Registries) because they will not have the > right to reassign parts of their address allocation. > > RIPE needs to have another class of member that is not an LIR. > > Ok, who will make it? RIPE itself or "we" need another proposal? -- Marcin Gondek / Drixter e-utp.net NIP: PL1181589645 REGON: 140584662 Tel. +48602159929 Fax. +48222012418 office at e-utp.net http://www.e-utp.net
- Previous message (by thread): [address-policy-wg] 2008-01 New Policy Proposal (Assigning IPv6 PI to Every Inetnum Holder)
- Next message (by thread): [address-policy-wg] 2008-01 New Policy Proposal (Assigning IPv6 PI to Every Inetnum Holder)
Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]