[address-policy-wg] Discrepancy Between RIPE Policies on IPv4 and IPv6 Provider Independent (PI) Address Space
- Previous message (by thread): [address-policy-wg] Discrepancy Between RIPE Policies on IPv4 and IPv6 Provider Independent (PI) Address Space
- Next message (by thread): [address-policy-wg] Discrepancy Between RIPE Policies on IPv4 and IPv6 Provider Independent (PI) Address Space
Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
Mark Scholten
mark at streamservice.nl
Tue May 4 19:22:29 CEST 2010
> -----Original Message----- > From: address-policy-wg-admin at ripe.net [mailto:address-policy-wg- > admin at ripe.net] On Behalf Of Sascha Luck > Sent: Tuesday, May 04, 2010 6:31 PM > To: Sander Steffann > Cc: address-policy-wg at ripe.net > Subject: Re: [address-policy-wg] Discrepancy Between RIPE Policies on > IPv4 and IPv6 Provider Independent (PI) Address Space > > Hi Sander, all, > > On Tue, May 04, 2010 at 04:29:50PM +0200, Sander Steffann wrote: > > What would then be the difference between PI and PA addresses? Do you > > think we should get rid of that distinction completely, or is this > not > > what you mean? I heard people talk about the distinction here at the > > RIPE meeting in Prague, so it seems to be a topic of discussion. > > I would be in favour of abandoning the distinction altogether for ipv6. > > 1) In ipv4, even now, many "LIRs" use PA space as "PI space", simply > because it was deemed easier to just become a LIR than go through > the PI "mill". Conversely, as mentioned, a lot of PI space is used as > "PA lite", this usually because it is cheaper and: > > 2) Many orgs have no staff trained in LIR procedures (and no time/money > to change that) and would gladly hand the bureaucracy off to their > friendly local LIR. > > 3) If address space were, simply, that, LIR functions could be handled > by "qualified" orgs and their customers (be they end-users or SPs) can > get routable and assignable address space; everyone wins. > > 4) Conceivably, if every "assignee" would have to become a member, > membership fees for everyone should fall significantly; again everyone > wins. It would also fulfil the requirements of 2007-01. Most small > SPs and end-users wouldn't mind becoming members if cost-effective. > What they don't want is the hassle of learning LIR procedures. I couldn't think for better words, I totally agree with points 1 to 4! Regards, Mark > > > rgds, > Sascha Luck > > > > > > Thanks, > > Sander > >
- Previous message (by thread): [address-policy-wg] Discrepancy Between RIPE Policies on IPv4 and IPv6 Provider Independent (PI) Address Space
- Next message (by thread): [address-policy-wg] Discrepancy Between RIPE Policies on IPv4 and IPv6 Provider Independent (PI) Address Space
Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]