Re: [address-policy-wg] Provider Independent (PI) IPv6 Assignments for End User Organisations (2006-01)
-
To: Woeber@localhost
-
From: Filiz Yilmaz filiz@localhost
-
Date: Thu, 28 Sep 2006 16:24:46 +0200
-
Cc: jordi.palet@localhost, "address-policy-wg@localhost" address-policy-wg@localhost
Hello,
Jordi already answered the question specifically about this proposal.
There is a presentation scheduled during RIPE 53 next week, on 5
October, for Thursday Plenary session. It will give a summary about this
proposal and others that are common across regions.
Kind regards,
Filiz Yilmaz
RIPE NCC
Policy Development Officer
Wilfried Woeber, UniVie/ACOnet wrote:
JORDI PALET MARTINEZ wrote:
[ ... ]
Last, but not least, I also will prefer a "common" policy across the
different regions, but I think we can't call it "global", because ICANN
process, and in any case, it may be very difficult to coordinate that if not
too late and impossible ...
That is actually an issue I'd like to comment on.
Regarding the use of words, what we can *try* to achieve across the regions is
a thing that is called "globally coordinated". The first time we applied that
approach to come up with (almost) identical, or at least very similar, polocies
in all regions was the (dreaded) "200 Customer rule" for IPv6 PA Allocations.
Whether it was wise to work towards such a compromise, which in retrospect left
many in the community unhappy, is a different story...
So - is anyone in a position to summarize for us which regions are doing that
already (ARIN afair, others?) and what the size detais are, or which regions
are working towards such a policy (RIPE obviously is).
Can the NCC help out here?
Wilfried.
|