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] Re: RIPE Access Policy Change Request to allow allocations to critical infrastructure
- Previous message (by thread): Antwort: Re: [address-policy-wg] RIPE Access Policy Change Request to allow allocations to critical infrastructure
- Next message (by thread): [address-policy-wg] Re: RIPE Access Policy Change Request to allow allocations to critical infrastructure
Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
Stephane Bortzmeyer
bortzmeyer at nic.fr
Thu Jan 8 11:04:33 CET 2004
On Wed, Jan 07, 2004 at 05:32:42PM +0100, Gert Doering <gert at space.net> wrote a message of 29 lines which said: > (This is not contradicting myself, I want to point out. The network > of the DENIC "office" is not special - but the name servers are. > The more, the better, and there is no way to do anycasting without > an additional routing table entry). Therefore we agree. What if DENIC changes its proposal to "critical resource *and* using anycasting"?
- Previous message (by thread): Antwort: Re: [address-policy-wg] RIPE Access Policy Change Request to allow allocations to critical infrastructure
- Next message (by thread): [address-policy-wg] Re: RIPE Access Policy Change Request to allow allocations to critical infrastructure
Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]