[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 11:13:40 CET 2008
Mikael Abrahamsson pisze: > >> - 100E yearly maintenance > > If not higher. Hidden cost to the community is much much higher as > each PI announcement translates (in the long run) to more expensive > routing platforms. > > We made a boo-boo with IPv4 in the PI area, let's not do it again with > IPv6. Assign real cost to having a slot in the global DFZ. That way > people that really really need PI will pay it (at 1000E a year it's > still a win situation at a few tens of work hours) and the ones who do > not, will not clutter the DFZ. > 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. -- 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 ]