Seconded.... Good to see a refreshing 'short and to the point' suggestion. After all that has been said over the past months, I guess we need something that will work, rather than be worked-around ! Mark
-----Original Message----- From: address-policy-wg-admin@ripe.net [mailto:address-policy-wg-admin@ripe.net] On Behalf Of Jeroen Massar Sent: 26 June 2007 20:01 To: Gert Doering Cc: Leo Vegoda; address-policy-wg@ripe.net Subject: Re: [address-policy-wg] 2006-02 Last Call for Comments (IPv6 Address Allocation and Assignment Policy)
I think it would make sense, to have "full-weight" LIRs
Gert Doering wrote: [..] that automatically
get a /32-or-bigger allocation, and possibly "light-weight" RIPE "customers" (to get the contractual stuff that is desired) that get a /48-or-so PI.
Just as a rough outline - details to be worked out.
The outline sounds good to me, you have my support (though of course show details first ;).
And it is *MUCH* better than the current proposals which are simply going to waste address space.
It is then also very simple "become member, pay fees, justify space requirement, get it, done presto"
Also that avoids any need for ULA-C as everybody is covered. Now if only the rest of the RIR community was able to understand that point.
Greets, Jeroen