On Mar 19, 2007, at 1:52 PM, Duncan Martin wrote:
In contractual terms, how will AfriNIC define "organisation"? On the
one hand, it's easy for an individual to form an association, and even
register it legally. It's also so that many trading entities have no
legal persona that is distinct from those of their owners as
individuals.
It seems to me that if an applicant meets the requirements as
specified
in the draft policy, the applicant's organisational form need not
concern AfriNIC.
May be may be not.
But based on the requirements in the draft, AfriNIC can decide
whether an entity qualifies for the space or not.
Let's not make a fuss out of this. As you have argued above, it's
easy for someone to register an association and thus qualify to get
the v6 space if the requirement is that an end-site must be an
organisation. I think AfriNIC should be left to make the decision
based on the application submitted.
-v
Duncan Martin
Do we want the PI policy for individuals or only organizations ?
Regards,
Jordi
De: Vincent Ngundi <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Responder a:
AfriNIC Resource
Policy Discussion List <[email protected]>
Fecha: Mon, 19 Mar 2007 09:35:22 +0300
Para: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, AfriNIC Resource Policy Discussion List
<[email protected]>
Asunto: Re: [AfriNIC-rpd] Re: [resource-policy] AfriNIC
Policy Proposal:
IPv6ProviderIndependent (PI) Assignment for End-Sites
On Mar 19, 2007, at 12:10 AM, Alain Patrick AINA wrote:
On Friday 16 March 2007 10:05:40 Vincent Ngundi wrote:
Hi Colleagues,
I'm sending a copy of Jordi's amendments to the draft policy I
proposed for your consideration.
Kindly note that the points he intends to alter are as follows:
(a) changing the word "end-user(s)" to "end-user-organisation(s)"
(b) changing the assignment target from provides of
"Public Internet
services" to providers of "services" thus;
"End-sites which provide Public Internet services for a single
administrative organisations' network, regardless of their size."
to
"End-sites which provide services for a single administrative
organisations' network, regardless of their size."
(c) There should be no need for assigning a prefix longer
than /48;
thus a minimum assignment of a /48 or a shorter prefix if AfriNIC
deems there's justification.
it is more than that.
d) changing "end-sites" to end-user-organizations
We could open long discussions on these points, but i
think they are
not necessary.
The initial draft updated with the results on discussions on
"boundary"
and "size" of the specific block to be used for the
assignments is
ok for me.
I agree with Alain.
-v
--alain
_______________________________________________
rpd mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.afrinic.net/mailman/listinfo.cgi/rpd
_______________________________________________
rpd mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.afrinic.net/mailman/listinfo.cgi/rpd
**********************************************
The IPv6 Portal: http://www.ipv6tf.org
Bye 6Bone. Hi, IPv6 !
http://www.ipv6day.org
This electronic message contains information which may be
privileged or confidential. The information is intended to be
for the use of the individual(s) named above. If you are not
the intended recipient be aware that any disclosure, copying,
distribution or use of the contents of this information,
including attached files, is prohibited.
_______________________________________________
rpd mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.afrinic.net/mailman/listinfo.cgi/rpd
_______________________________________________
rpd mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.afrinic.net/mailman/listinfo.cgi/rpd
_______________________________________________
rpd mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.afrinic.net/mailman/listinfo.cgi/rpd
