![]() |
![]() |
|
You're here: Home |
It had been my understanding that IPv6 policy would be co-ordinated
among the RIRs, but this seems to imply a regional policy like IPv4.
That's also one method of the policy process that's proved to work
well, but it should at least be a concious decision by the RIRs(or its
communities).
Could someone from the RIRs share the position about this?
Izumi
JPNIC
From: German Valdez <german@lacnic.net>
Subject: [GLOBAL-V6]IPv6 Policy Proposal for LACNIC Region
Date: Thu, 11 Dec 2003 08:16:29 -0300
>
>
> FYI LACNIC is calling for last comments for new policies to be applied next
> year. One of this policies is a new criteria for IPv6 Initial allocation.
>
> This proposal is the result of the analysis of the LACNIC IPv6 WG and the
> discussion held during our Open Policy Forum in The Havana, Cuba
>
> You can review this proposal at http://lacnic.net/en/last-call.html
>
> On december 9th we started a 45 days period for comments for these
> policies, including the IPv6 one. Comments will be received through our
> policy public list politicas@lacnic.net, subscription to this list is open
> at http://lacnic.net/en/lists.html. Any comments are welcomed.
>
> Regards
>
>
>
> German Valdez
> Policy Liaison
> LACNIC
>
> _______________________________________________
> global-v6 mailing list
> global-v6@lists.apnic.net
> http://mailman.apnic.net/mailman/listinfo/global-v6
>
_______________________________________________
global-v6 mailing list
global-v6@lists.apnic.net
http://mailman.apnic.net/mailman/listinfo/global-v6