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] IPv6 access to K-root
- Previous message (by thread): [address-policy-wg] IPv6 access to K-root
- Next message (by thread): [address-policy-wg] IPv6 access to K-root
Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
Jeroen Massar
jeroen at unfix.org
Mon Feb 28 10:34:59 CET 2005
On Sat, 2005-02-26 at 20:22 +0100, Kurt Erik Lindqvist wrote: >-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- >Hash: SHA1 > > >On Feb 25, 2005, at 20:04, Elmar K. Bins wrote: > >> kurtis at kurtis.pp.se (Kurt Erik Lindqvist) wrote: >> >>> Well, in JP you also have to get your addresses from a NIR and you >>> will >>> have a local whoisdb in Japaneese...etc...it's a different model >>> entirely. On the whois front I am actually extremely happy that AFRINIC got raised by RIPE as they will get the goody neato RIPE whoisdb software that at least is consistent, parsable and best of all supports CIDR. (ARIN doesn't support CIDR, though some queries they seem to strip off the /32 etc., they should simply upgrade to the RIPE version, which APNIC also uses, and then kick LACNIC to do the same) >> Which, as the ITU proposes, we'll face with v6 anyway. >> >Well, instead of RIPE dinners we will just have to used to do >coctail-parties in Geneva in suits. At least the skiing is good :-) /me raises hand for the skiing! Though I do hope you mean a ski-suite, I don't wear ties and with the current tendency of -15 on the slopes, a normal suit will be quite chilly :) As for the IETF, shim6 WG, yes indeed give this a chance, I am quite sure this is going to work out for most people, except for the ones who really have only one thing on their minds: an entry in the routing table to be really cool and interresting. But that part should simply be like the IPv6 allocations are supposed to be: if you are a large ISP, providing for a lot (200+ seems a nice limit) customers, you are entitled a place in the routing entry, the rest can shim6, they usually don't have their own infrastructure anyways... (no your home network does not count ;) Greets, Jeroen -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: signature.asc Type: application/pgp-signature Size: 240 bytes Desc: This is a digitally signed message part URL: </ripe/mail/archives/address-policy-wg/attachments/20050228/a9a7d095/attachment.sig>
- Previous message (by thread): [address-policy-wg] IPv6 access to K-root
- Next message (by thread): [address-policy-wg] IPv6 access to K-root
Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]