Hi Kai, below.

Regards,
Jordi
 
 

-----Mensaje original-----
De: address-policy-wg <[email protected]> en nombre de Kai 
'wusel' Siering <[email protected]>
Organización: Unseen University, Department of Magic Mails
Fecha: sábado, 19 de mayo de 2018, 18:11
Para: <[email protected]>
Asunto: Re: [address-policy-wg] proposal to remove IPv6 PI

    Am 19.05.2018 um 12:07 schrieb JORDI PALET MARTINEZ via address-policy-wg:
    > My proposal is NOT to stop IPv6 PI,
    
    Alternative facts? The title says "to remove IPv6 PI".

[Jordi] You're taking the tittle literally. If this is a problem I will find a 
better one "remove differentiation between PI and PA" or whatever. I think 
across the emails it has been clear. What I think is needed is to remove the 
fact that PI is assignment and PA is allocation and the "consequences of that". 
Both should be the same, regardless of fees, contract type, etc.
    
    > As I explained already, the intent is not to increase the end-user fees 
so they pay the same as an LIR, but to have some "proportionality" and to pay 
for the "real" NCC cost (which maybe still 50 euros, or maybe not, I don't know 
that, it is something that the NCC should calculate).
    
    I've read multiple times that costs are out of scope for the APWG. So 
without a change towards a per resource fee structure – which is out of scope 
here –, the proposed change forces PIv6 holders to either become a LIR at 
1400,-- EUR/year or abandon their assignment.


[Jordi] Please read the other emails. Not an issue if that's the difficulty. 
The goal is that everything is "allocation". There are many possible ways to do 
that from the AGM perspective, and even if we don't decide that here, we must 
discuss it here because it provide "light" on the possible avenues.
    
    Regards,
    -kai
    
    
    



**********************************************
IPv4 is over
Are you ready for the new Internet ?
http://www.consulintel.es
The IPv6 Company

This electronic message contains information which may be privileged or 
confidential. The information is intended to be for the exclusive use of the 
individual(s) named above and further non-explicilty authorized disclosure, 
copying, distribution or use of the contents of this information, even if 
partially, including attached files, is strictly prohibited and will be 
considered a criminal offense. If you are not the intended recipient be aware 
that any disclosure, copying, distribution or use of the contents of this 
information, even if partially, including attached files, is strictly 
prohibited, will be considered a criminal offense, so you must reply to the 
original sender to inform about this communication and delete it.





Reply via email to