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] 2006-05 New Policy Proposal (PI Assignment Size)
- Previous message (by thread): [address-policy-wg] 2006-05 New Policy Proposal (PI Assignment Size)
- Next message (by thread): [address-policy-wg] 2006-05 New Policy Proposal (PI Assignment Size)
Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
Mikael Abrahamsson
swmike at swm.pp.se
Tue Aug 29 10:45:40 CEST 2006
On Tue, 29 Aug 2006, Filiz Yilmaz wrote: > This proposal suggests to have the minimum assignment size for PI > assignments to be a /24 when routing is a major issue for a > multihoming End User. > > http://www.ripe.net/ripe/policies/proposals/2006-05.html > > We encourage you to review this proposal and send your comments to > <address-policy-wg at ripe.net> before 26 September 2006. Hello. This proposal is proposing the same things I was arguing in my email, so I second this. I have a question though, the proposal includes the notion of "major issue", perhaps this could be specified a bit more? Or is it clear how this would be interpreted by a hostmaster processing an application, that if the customer adds "I need to advertise this on the public internet" it will automatically be known that a at least a /24 is needed? -- Mikael Abrahamsson email: swmike at swm.pp.se
- Previous message (by thread): [address-policy-wg] 2006-05 New Policy Proposal (PI Assignment Size)
- Next message (by thread): [address-policy-wg] 2006-05 New Policy Proposal (PI Assignment Size)
Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]