Re: [address-policy-wg] IPv6 PI policy implemented

[Sascha Lenz slz@localhost]

Hi,

Marc van Selm schrieb:
> I'm wondering. ARIN and AfriNIC assign PI space for end-sites. They both 
> do /48 (ARIN also does a /48 as I remember correctly). Isn't the discussion 
> in the RIPE area not getting a bit too long and taken over by events.
> As an example, NATO can also just as easily apply for space from ARIN 
> (although RIPE covers more of NATO's area of operation as it seems). 
> Something similar would be true for many International customers interested 
> in PI.
> Just wondering... Shouldn't we just give up our strong feelings and face the 
> fact that other bits of the world have already acted, just do it and 
> coordinate a global route filter policy etc so that things actually work?
[...]

yes, "we" should do that, please send some troops to repacify the enemy 
dorkheads, thank you :-)
</sarcasm>

A while ago, i made a rather simple suggestion as a reaction to Jordi's 
latest incarnation of his PI-policy proposal (which is - sorry- stupid).
The only concerns i've seen about it so far was that one might be a bit 
more precise about the wording.
Since then i haven't seen much activitiy about the proposal anymore.

I feel the urge to move on here. The PDP is getting really stupid at 
this point (>1,5 years?).
If nothing positively happens with 2006-01 soon, i tend to hand in my 
own proposal and call for NATO air support :-)
--
========================================================================
= Sascha Lenz                  SLZ-RIPE          slz@localhost         =
= Network Operations                                                   =
= BayCIX GmbH, Landshut                  * PGP public Key on demand *  =
========================================================================