This archive is retained to ensure existing URLs remain functional. It will not contain any emails sent to this mailing list after July 1, 2024. For all messages, including those sent before and after this date, please visit the new location of the archive at https://mailman.ripe.net/archives/list/[email protected]/
[address-policy-wg] Summary of the PI Task Force's recent discussions
- Previous message (by thread): [address-policy-wg] Summary of the PI Task Force's recent discussions
- Next message (by thread): [address-policy-wg] Summary of the PI Task Force's recent discussions
Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
Gert Doering
gert at space.net
Mon Aug 11 11:50:59 CEST 2003
Hi,
On Mon, Aug 11, 2003 at 11:48:28AM +0200, Joao Luis Silva Damas wrote:
> I have one question, trying to understand the main goal of the exercise:
>
> * Is the aim of the a new PI policy to adjust the policy to the
> requests and needs of the industry or is it a way of getting a "special
> allocation" policy by another name?
My aim is to adjust the policy (actually both PA and PI policy) to match
observed need.
People are requesting *multiple* PI blocks because they can't get a PA
allocation, and that seems to be just wrong to me.
Gert Doering
-- NetMaster
--
Total number of prefixes smaller than registry allocations: 56535 (56318)
SpaceNet AG Mail: netmaster at Space.Net
Joseph-Dollinger-Bogen 14 Tel : +49-89-32356-0
80807 Muenchen Fax : +49-89-32356-299
- Previous message (by thread): [address-policy-wg] Summary of the PI Task Force's recent discussions
- Next message (by thread): [address-policy-wg] Summary of the PI Task Force's recent discussions
Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]