IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [v6ops] [Fwd: I-D Action: draft-ietf-v6ops-icp-guidance-03.txt]

Tore Anderson <tore.anderson@redpill-linpro.com> Fri, 31 August 2012 08:58 UTC

Return-Path: <tore.anderson@redpill-linpro.com>
X-Original-To: v6ops@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: v6ops@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id EAF2921F8546 for <v6ops@ietfa.amsl.com>; Fri, 31 Aug 2012 01:58:23 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.599
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.599 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-2.599]
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 1RC5eVzn2AIN for <v6ops@ietfa.amsl.com>; Fri, 31 Aug 2012 01:58:23 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from zimbra.redpill-linpro.com (zimbra.redpill-linpro.com [87.238.49.234]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9BB9021F850D for <v6ops@ietf.org>; Fri, 31 Aug 2012 01:58:22 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from localhost (localhost.localdomain [127.0.0.1]) by zimbra.redpill-linpro.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 952811820030; Fri, 31 Aug 2012 10:58:20 +0200 (CEST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at claudius.linpro.no
Received: from zimbra.redpill-linpro.com ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (zimbra.redpill-linpro.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 9s2I+qFwtvgB; Fri, 31 Aug 2012 10:58:20 +0200 (CEST)
Received: from envy.fud.no (cm-84.209.194.19.getinternet.no [84.209.194.19]) by zimbra.redpill-linpro.com (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 29F34182002A; Fri, 31 Aug 2012 10:58:20 +0200 (CEST)
Message-ID: <50407CAB.4060903@redpill-linpro.com>
Date: Fri, 31 Aug 2012 10:58:19 +0200
From: Tore Anderson <tore.anderson@redpill-linpro.com>
Organization: Redpill Linpro AS
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:15.0) Gecko/20120828 Thunderbird/15.0
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: Brian E Carpenter <brian.e.carpenter@gmail.com>
References: <5040646F.6000103@gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <5040646F.6000103@gmail.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="windows-1252"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Cc: IPv6 Operations <v6ops@ietf.org>
Subject: Re: [v6ops] [Fwd: I-D Action: draft-ietf-v6ops-icp-guidance-03.txt]
X-BeenThere: v6ops@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12
Precedence: list
List-Id: v6ops discussion list <v6ops.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/v6ops>, <mailto:v6ops-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/v6ops>
List-Post: <mailto:v6ops@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:v6ops-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/v6ops>, <mailto:v6ops-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 31 Aug 2012 08:58:24 -0000

Regarding PI addresses, the new version says:

«This option is available to an ICP willing to deal directly with the
relevant Regional Internet Registry and pay the associated fees»

This is misleading, at least in the RIPE NCC service area. An ICP could
opt to obtain PI addresses through his LIR of choice. This LIR is then
called a «sponsoring LIR». The RIPE NCC very obviously tries to steer PI
users in that direction - a single PI resource registered through a
sponsoring LIR costs €50/year (which will on the LIR's invoice), while a
direct assignment from the NCC costs €1300/year + a one-time fee of
€2000. See
<http://www.ripe.net/lir-services/member-support/info/billing/ripe-ncc-billing-information>.

Best regards,
-- 
Tore Anderson
Redpill Linpro AS - http://www.redpill-linpro.com/

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email