Strong support in principle. We have been denied IPv6 temporary assignments due to the NCC's interpretation that a single DHCP lease on wifi is a "subassignment" to another entity, which was clearly not the intention. I note that the "New policy text" does not specify the replacement text for the "Contractual Requirements" Regards, David On 21 October 2016 at 10:15, Marco Schmidt <mschmidt@ripe.net> wrote:
Dear colleagues,
A new RIPE Policy proposal 2016-04, "IPv6 PI Sub-assignment Clarification" is now available for discussion.
The goal of this proposal is to define sub-assignments in IPv6 PI assignments as subnets of /64 and shorter.
You can find the full proposal at:
https://www.ripe.net/participate/policies/proposals/2016-04
We encourage you to review this proposal and send your comments to <address-policy-wg@ripe.net> before 21 November 2016.
Regards,
Marco Schmidt Policy Development Officer RIPE NCC
Sent via RIPE Forum -- https://www.ripe.net/participate/mail/forum
-- David Croft For support enquiries please always contact support at sargasso.net and not any named individual. UK: 0845 034 5020 USA: 212-400-1694 Sargasso Networks Ltd. Registered in England and Wales No. 06404839. Registered Office: 46a Albert Road North, Reigate, Surrey, RH2 9EL http://www.sargasso.net/