Search RPD Archives
Limit search to: Subject & Body Subject Author
Sort by:

[rpd] policy proposal - Clarification on IPv6 Sub-Assignments

Sander Steffann sander at
Wed Aug 15 17:18:18 UTC 2018

Hi Jordi,

> Mmm ... maybe even simpler:
> "Non-permanently provisioning an address or prefix to a third party device, for use on a network managed and operated by the assignment holder, shall not be considered a sub-assignment. The provision of addresses for (semi-)permanent connectivity like ISP and broadband services is still considered a sub-assignment, with the exception of point-to-point links."

No, that limits it to non-permanent again. You are undoing exactly what I added... You are making it even more restrictive, not even allowing the VM use-case you mentioned in your previous email.


More information about the RPD mailing list