[Apwg-ipv6-papi] 2013-06 - where to?

[Elvis Velea]

Hi everyone,

I've followed the discussion on 2013-06 on the mailing list and although 
there was not much discussed (I hoped to see more people involved in the 
conversation) I decided, this time, to just watch and see what others say.

I have the feeling that the answer is 'yes, we need this but the way you 
are trying to achieve it is too complex'.

I am not sure if we should already kill the proposal, most of the 
participants have said 'this is a great idea'.


Where do we go now? Olaf, Daniel, are you still interested in continuing 
the work on this proposal and prepare something which is not that 
complex? I, for sure, will continue working on this one way or an other.

Gert, Sander - what do you guys think?
- Should we just abandon this proposal and try to make a few smaller 
changes (in different policy proposals) that would lead to the same result?
- Should we go back to the drawing board and try to make less changes 
that may be accepted by the community?


Hoping that you do not think we should abandon the proposal, I'm coming 
with the following scenario for the version 2:

I'm thinking that if we abandon the idea of removing the differences 
between assignments and allocations, this change will no longer be that 
complex. (we would still remove most of the differences between PI/PA)

We would have:
- allocations made by the RIPE NCC to:
   - LIR (just as it is today)
   - Sponsored IR (will be the change of this policy)

- assignments to the end-user made by:
  - RIPE NCC (just as it is today - PI)
  - LIR (just as it is today - PA)
  - Sponsored IR (will be the change of this policy)

- sub-allocations made by:
  - LIR (just as it is today)
  - Sponsored IR (not sure if we should allow this)
    - in my opinion, this was the biggest change to digest, allowing 
SIRs to further sub-allocate

Discussion about the charging scheme would then be:

- LIRs - pay as they pay today
- Users of Assignments made by the RIPE NCC - pay as they pay today
- Sponsored IR that receive an allocation - pay a fee in between the two 
above


On the other hand we could abandon 2013-06 and propose a change in the 
PI policy, allowing the RIPE NCC to make 'PI allocations'. And once this 
change would be accepted, we could try to unify the two policies.

cheers,
elvis