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] IPv6 Policy Clarification - Initial allocation criteria "d)"
- Previous message (by thread): [address-policy-wg] IPv6 Policy Clarification - Initial allocation criteria "d)"
- Next message (by thread): [address-policy-wg] IPv6 Policy Clarification - Initial allocation criteria "d)"
Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
Sascha Luck
ripe-lst at eirconnect.net
Tue Jun 22 13:23:50 CEST 2004
Hi Gert, all, On Tuesday 22 June 2004 07:45, Gert Doering wrote: > As of today, "more-specific BGP multihoming" works. So he *can* set > his own routing policy. It's certainly a work-around if all else fails. I'm not sure it should be *encouraged* though, since announcing more-specific routes flies in the face of aggregation. Besides, don't most people filter on allocation boundaries? rgds, Sascha Luck -- DDO Eirconnect
- Previous message (by thread): [address-policy-wg] IPv6 Policy Clarification - Initial allocation criteria "d)"
- Next message (by thread): [address-policy-wg] IPv6 Policy Clarification - Initial allocation criteria "d)"
Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]