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: [ipv6-wg] IPv6 micro allocation or something else?
- Previous message (by thread): [address-policy-wg] Re: [ipv6-wg] IPv6 micro allocation or something else?
- Next message (by thread): [address-policy-wg] Re: [ipv6-wg] IPv6 micro allocation or something else?
Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
Carsten Schiefner
ripe-wgs.cs at schiefner.de
Fri Nov 18 17:26:36 CET 2005
Hi Michael, Michael.Dillon at btradianz.com wrote: >>>If they don't move quickly, then someone else will build that >>>anycast infrastructure and both DENIC and AFNIC will be reduced >>>to being customers instead of network operators. >> >>why would that be? > > Organizations who build and operate network are > network operators. Organizations who buy network > services from network operators are customers. that's clear - I just wondered where the conclusion came from that if someone would build an anycast infrastructure TLD operators had no other chance than to just become customers of those. Best, Carsten
- Previous message (by thread): [address-policy-wg] Re: [ipv6-wg] IPv6 micro allocation or something else?
- Next message (by thread): [address-policy-wg] Re: [ipv6-wg] IPv6 micro allocation or something else?
Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]