Hi, On Sat, May 19, 2018 at 12:07:50PM +0200, JORDI PALET MARTINEZ via address-policy-wg wrote: > My proposal is NOT to stop IPv6 PI, it is only to make a *single* > category of LIRs for both that accommodate real IPv6 addressing > size needs, because PI and PA are the same, it is just an artificial > name.
Speaking for my PI-holding (IPv4 and IPv6) customers, most of them do
not *want* to be a LIR. They have a nice contract with a local company
(us) that does all the paperwork for them, speaks their local language,
they can visit our office if needed, we handle the international money
transfer bit, etc.
Some *cannot* become a LIR due to governing laws that disallow them
to join any sort of association.
So "doing away with end-users that have their own space and are not
a RIPE member" is not going to fly.
Gert Doering
-- speaking as sponsoring LIR admin
--
have you enabled IPv6 on something today...?
SpaceNet AG Vorstand: Sebastian v. Bomhard, Michael Emmer
Joseph-Dollinger-Bogen 14 Aufsichtsratsvors.: A. Grundner-Culemann
D-80807 Muenchen HRB: 136055 (AG Muenchen)
Tel: +49 (0)89/32356-444 USt-IdNr.: DE813185279
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
