Greetings! I am against this. I do not like making a special case out of RIPE meetings. But I support the basic idea that a conference organizer should be able to get an IPv6 PI assignment (as 2006-1 is turned into policy). I do not like newly proposed status 'ASSIGNED MEETING' also. I would support any prospective policy proposal which makes NCC able to set a contractual realtionship with itself, if needed to use 2006-1 in this or in any similar case. Best regards, Tomas Hlavacek Andrei Robachevsky wrote:
Dear Colleagues,
This is an informal submission of the proposal that was presented at RIPE 57 in Dubai (http://www.ripe.net/ripe/meetings/ripe-57/presentations/Robachevsky-IPv6_ass...), as was suggested by the community.
Your feedback is appreciated as well as your opinion whether a formal submission should follow.
Regards,
Andrei Robachevsky RIPE NCC