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] 200 customer requirements for IPv6
- Previous message (by thread): [address-policy-wg] Re: Re: 200 customer requirements for IPv6
- Next message (by thread): [address-policy-wg] 200 customer requirements for IPv6
Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
Tim Streater
tim.streater at dante.org.uk
Mon Nov 21 18:21:53 CET 2005
At 09:52 18/11/2005, Jeroen Massar wrote: >If you are really too small, that is you have at most 10 sites, then you >simply are too small. Actually two sites at present. But I wouldn't call a network that will provide v6 transit for the NRENs of a dozen or so Mediterranean countries "small", in the sense of significance. As I said, I haven't looked at this issue for a while, but I do recall that the policy was: 1) Getting space required the 200 customer plan 2) No PI space for v6 If this is the stated policy, doesn't seem much point in making an enquiry. If I were able to get the space, (1), and (2) notwithstanding, what would be the point of the policy? The present policy models a small portion of reality, and appears to leave major portions unprovided for, as others e-mails have attested. -- Tim
- Previous message (by thread): [address-policy-wg] Re: Re: 200 customer requirements for IPv6
- Next message (by thread): [address-policy-wg] 200 customer requirements for IPv6
Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]