IPv6 Provider Independent (PI) Assignment for End-Sites | AFPUB-2007-v6-001

IPv6 Provider Independent (PI) Assignment for End-Sites | AFPUB-2007-v6-001

Évaluation: Éléments insuffisants pour évaluer la cohérence · The author treats organizational use as a good justification for direct resources and warns that widespread individual assignments could impose routing costs even when address space itself is sufficient. The express qualification for justified cases prevents reading this as an absolute ban on every individual assignment. One message cannot establish whether that preference persisted or changed.

Réserves: The population and router-cost figures are illustrative assertions by the author, not verified measurements. · This concerns IPv6 PI assignment eligibility, not a stance on the separately documented AFRINIC policy-development-process proposal. · The earlier July 2006 clarification is now linked to the separately recovered afpol-v60604 proposal; it is not an earlier version of this verified policy corpus.

19 mars 2007

In principle our policies are not made for individuals accessing those resources, unless clearly justified (and in this case I think a good justification is to be an organization).

19 mars 2007

Is not only about the addressing space, which probably could perfectly cope with that for 100% of the world population if using /48, but what about the routing slots ?

19 mars 2007

We need a balance here.

Provider-Independent (PI) IPv6 Assignments for End-User-Organizations

Évaluation: Éléments insuffisants pour évaluer la cohérence · The author acknowledges that the proposal copied text from his RIPE draft and says to replace RIPE NCC with AFRINIC. That is a specific clarification of intended regional applicability, not an explicit vote on all provisions and not evidence of a changed position over time.

Réserves: The clarification does not by itself verify that the published draft was amended or adopted.

11 juil. 2006

Is a typo, replace RIPE NCC with AfriNIC and you're done.

11 juil. 2006

This happened in the policy because the text was taken from my proposal to RIPE NCC and we didn't reviewed accurately all the text.

Provider-Independent (PI) IPv6 Assignments for End-User-Organizations · IPv6 Provider Independent (PI) Assignment for End-Sites | AFPUB-2007-v6-001

Évaluation: Éléments insuffisants pour évaluer la cohérence · Correcting the region named in a 2006 eligibility clause and arguing for justified organizational eligibility in a distinct 2007 proposal are compatible but not directly comparable acts. The source record does not support either a contradiction claim or a strong longitudinal-consistency claim across the two proposals.

Réserves: The proposals have separate source identities and must not be merged solely because both concern IPv6 PI. · No position is inferred from text quoted from another author.

11 juil. 2006

Is a typo, replace RIPE NCC with AfriNIC and you're done.

19 mars 2007

In principle our policies are not made for individuals accessing those resources, unless clearly justified (and in this case I think a good justification is to be an organization).