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

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

On Thursday 19 July 2007 11:08, JORDI PALET MARTINEZ wrote:
> I guess in the case of NATO the new modifications to the existing policy,
> that removes the 200 customers and allows organizations being "ISPs"
> internally to the organization, is the right now for the NATO case. I
> recall indeed someone from NATO indicated that to me some months ago.
>
> Regards,
> Jordi

Yes Jordi, I'm Guilty as charged (I was that someone. I'm involved in IPv6 
transition planning for NATO from a network architectural perspective.)! Yes 
I've talking about the "200 customer rule" before. It is all in the 
definition of a customer. To summarise, NATO has a service provisioning 
agency which could become a LIR. It serves to NATO Agencies and NATO 
operations. 200 customers requires creativity in defining what a customer is 
but it can be done. And I've tested that concept with Leo Vegoda at the time 
by submitting a proforma initial allocation request. Leo felt happy enough 
about it at the time. So that gave me a warm feeling that this bit of the 
IPv6 transition plan will fly (or can be made to fly). Indeed NATO's service 
provisioning agency would fit best into a LIR role but it could also work 
with PI space if it was provisioned in a *useful* way. (I won't go into the 
details of the NATO networks and potential links via or to the Internet but I 
do not foresee routing issues there).

Best regards, Marc van Selm
-- 

                -- This mail is personal --
All statements in this mail are made from my own personal
perspective and do not necessarily reflect my employer's
opinions or policies.