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/address-policy-wg@ripe.net/
[address-policy-wg] Policy Change Request - Allow address allocations for anycast DNS operation
- Previous message (by thread): [address-policy-wg] Policy Change Request - Allow address allocations for anycast DNS operation
- Next message (by thread): [address-policy-wg] Policy Change Request - Allow address allocations for anycast DNS operation
Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
Peter Koch
pk at TechFak.Uni-Bielefeld.DE
Wed Jun 9 14:43:52 CEST 2004
> that would break the 512 limit in a "signifacant" number of responses. > What I have heard so far the expected number of requests for this kind of > allocations will be in a range that most believe that it is not necessary > to knit the mesh too tight but give a credit to the applicant. Since the breaking of the limit happens at the parent can the parent be involved (not sure that you want that for the particular parent ...)? -Peter
- Previous message (by thread): [address-policy-wg] Policy Change Request - Allow address allocations for anycast DNS operation
- Next message (by thread): [address-policy-wg] Policy Change Request - Allow address allocations for anycast DNS operation
Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]