Re: [address-policy-wg] Re: 200 customer requirements for IPv6

[Marc van Selm <marc.van.selm@localhost]

On Wednesday 04 January 2006 11:59, Jeroen Massar wrote:

[...]
> The IT department or even special Networking department is effectively
> the "ISP" for the organization. That they only service customers of
> their mother company is not the question here: they service 200 customers.
[...]
> > But it is a bit artificial. I don't expect RIPE
> > will reject a request but it illustrates the hoops that a large org with
> > a large network that is part of their strategic assets will have to go
> > through.
>
> Which hoop? Any construct of the above will have no problem in getting
> address space from any of the RIR's. If they do try and get rejected
> they should explain their situation here, if possible, and explain what
> they are missing so that the policy can be amended or a special policy
> be created for these cases.

Yes you are right and that's how I'd like to treat it for NATO. The definition 
of an organization and customer is sufficiently flexible. So if flexibility 
of definitions is acceptable (non of us wants to be a lawyer I presume) than 
we should (should?) close the thread and move on.

Best regards, Marc
-- 
Marc van Selm
NATO C3 Agency
CIS Division
E-mail: marc.van.selm@localhost (PGP capable)
This mail is not stating NATO policy but must be considered as informal 
exchange of views.