[Apwg-ipv6-papi] policy proposal done?

[Daniel Stolpe]

On Fri, 30 Aug 2013, Sander Steffann wrote:

> Hi,
>
>> Well...  "quite a lot of entities" is exaggerating a bit, I think - I still
>> haven't seen anyone show up on the APWG list and just plainly *propose*
>> that we remove the "no subassignments!" restriction on the PI policy.
>>
>> I'd assume that if this we really hurting that much, someone might propose
>> to change it...
>
> Just ignoring it is easier...
> Sander

I promise, we (my company) see them often. Maybe the situation in Sweden 
differs from the rest of the RIPE region. I know it does in some ways 
because we were early adopters. They are used to getting IPv4 space from 
(or with the help of) us, and now they come to us asking to help them with 
IPv6 and some of them are clever enough to say "We don't want to make the 
same mistakes as we did with IPv4" (they often find themselves with lots 
of small chunks of IPv4). So they ask for a big chunk of IPv6, that will 
last a good while.

So we are starting a few more LIR:s for these guys but I don't think that 
is the right way.

Cheers,

Daniel

_________________________________________________________________________________
Daniel Stolpe           Tel:  08 - 688 11 81                   stolpe at resilans.se
Resilans AB             Fax:  08 - 55 00 21 63            http://www.resilans.se/
Box 13 054							      556741-1193
103 02 Stockholm