Hello, So maybe we can make this way: There is some membership free for PI user and then some yearly payment to keep it working. Please understand, not anyone have to be LIR
First of all, I don't think the majority is afraid of the idea of PI itself (the old "carriers want to constrain their customers" myth), the majority is afraid of running it like it is currently done for IPv4 in the RIPE region. I'm talking about PI space that is visible in the DFZ here of course, unannounced PI space should mostly be covered by ULA. [...] but I don't think there is any legal loophole where you could apply it to the already assigned space.
Bernhard
So maybe we can make this way: Make some membership fee for PI user and then some yearly payment to keep it working. For example: - 500E setup fee - 100E for ASN request for this PI Plus some kind monitoring, if PI addresses in request are requested for public use, not internal then: - have to be visible by RIPE router more than 75% time in year from date of assignment + 1 month. - 100E yearly maintenance If there availability time is smaller than 75%, again there is a setup fee or addresses backing to RIPE. Also ASN can be taken back to the RIPE. If PI addresses are requested for internal usage: - 200E yearly maintenance Every PI-member can have only one /48 prefix if we need more, then have to be a LIR, have to have a legal business in RIPE region and etc. Then, RIPE make a special /32 where those /48 are stored (for easy filtering). Please understand, not everyone have to be LIR because they don't need it to be, but they need PI address because they have >1 upstreams. It's very popular here in Poland. Now I hearing for people: "We don't implement IPv6 because there is no PI procedure. We don't want to be a LIR." I'm not a LIR, I just wondering, maybe someone will agree with me for this PI idea. Regards, -- Marcin Gondek / Drixter e-utp.net NIP: PL1181589645 REGON: 140584662 Tel. +48602159929 Fax. +48222012418 office@e-utp.net http://www.e-utp.net