This archive is retained to ensure existing URLs remain functional. It will not contain any emails sent to this mailing list after July 1, 2024. For all messages, including those sent before and after this date, please visit the new location of the archive at https://mailman.ripe.net/archives/list/address-policy-wg@ripe.net/
[address-policy-wg] 2013-06 New Policy Proposal (PA/PI Unification IPv6 Address Space)
- Previous message (by thread): [address-policy-wg] 2013-06 New Policy Proposal (PA/PI Unification IPv6 Address Space)
- Next message (by thread): [address-policy-wg] 2013-06 New Policy Proposal (PA/PI Unification IPv6 Address Space)
Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
Elvis Velea
elvis at velea.eu
Tue Oct 1 10:55:43 CEST 2013
Hi Tore, On 10/1/13 9:08 AM, Tore Anderson wrote: > * Elvis Velea > >> No, I do not agree to call them LIR, the LIR is well defined. You are >> right, we maybe should not call them End Users either, let's work on >> redefining the End User to something else. > > The terms LIR (and IR) is indeed well defined, and that's indeed my > point - these new "super End Users" actually fit that definition. :-) Okay, got the point and somehow agree with it. > > (I'm only talking about the role of the LIR in the Internet Registry > System here, so to be clear I'm *not* equating "LIR" to "direct member > of the RIPE NCC who pays the full membership fee and has voting rights > at the AGM", nor am I saying that everyone who holds PI space should be > forced become such direct members of the RIPE NCC.) > Well, since the assignments will be removed, anyone receiving a sub-allocation from the friendly provider can further sub-allocate (as long as they receive more than a /64) and become some sort of IR. But, would you consider yourself an IR if you receive a sub-allocation from your ISP and sub-allocate a /64 to your brother for his web server? > Anyway, I think I've made my point, so I'll leave it at that and let > this be my last message on the subject. Like I've said before, this is > not intended to be a "my way or the highway" statement of opposition, > just a (hopefully) constructive piece of feedback you and your > co-authors may do with as you wish. One of the slides at the RIPE Meeting (and I hope you will be in Athens) will be related to this subject and I hope we can have a constructive discussion and reach a good decision. thanks for all the feedback, please continue to bring it on ;) cheers, elvis
- Previous message (by thread): [address-policy-wg] 2013-06 New Policy Proposal (PA/PI Unification IPv6 Address Space)
- Next message (by thread): [address-policy-wg] 2013-06 New Policy Proposal (PA/PI Unification IPv6 Address Space)
Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]