Re: [address-policy-wg] IPv6 assignment for the RIPE meeting network

[Andrei Robachevsky andrei@localhost]

Jeroen, thank you for your comments,

I think it is important that we agree on the main idea. That's why this
proposal was send to the wg for informal discussion, rather then
submitted to the PDP.

Jeroen Massar wrote on 19-11-2008 14:39:
[...]

> 
> Thus, if there is going to be a 'meeting policy' then it should be well
> defined and very generic and also allow every other "Meeting" to make
> use of it, even if the event is a one-timer. And as we have End-user/LIR
> payment now, somebody has to foot the bill for them too.
> 

Whether that is going to be a meeting policy, or as Remco suggested a
RIPE NCC policy, or just a policy to document that specific assignment
is equally fine by me. I leave this to people more experienced in the
policy area.

Our objective is to get a permanent dedicated assignment for a community
meeting. This is not unusual, for example IETF got such assignment from
APNIC.

> Greets,
>  Jeroen
> 
> * = too many bits in network on purpose
> 

Regards,

Andrei Robachevsky
RIPE NCC