> Right now, there are two different shades of "PI colour" - "real PI" > and "not really real PI".
is there a list of all the colors and what they mean? > This proposal aims to unify all PI into one colour, which I think is > good for the resource holders (no uncertainity) - but there is > potential fallout, like "we've been doing IPv4 PI assignments all the > years, and nobody bothered!" - which technically could be done from > "ALLOCATED UNSPECIFIED" blocks, but was always outside RIPE policies - > and if these are now properly labeled and tagged, certain business > practices might no longer be possible. are certain business practices to be compared to uncertain business practices? :) i have this feeling you are trying to say something here. i.e. if i am the LIR, can i move "not really real PI" between customers and no one knows? > Also, it might lead to deaggs (Markus' case) where a /14 that was > originally "in one LIR" would be "3x /16, plus some smaller fragments > in the LIR" and "lots of /24 PI managed by the NCC" now - so the /14 > won't get a ROA, and he'll have to announce more-specifics. lemme see if i get this. to have the owner registration correct, some address space will have to be broken up and owned by multiple IRs, thus fragmenting routing? i like correct registration, but the commons has become pretty polluted. > So, to answer your question: for those "swampy PI", it would alter > their rights (contracts according to 2007-01), costs (50 EUR/year) whoops. that's gonna cause unhappiness. randy
