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: [address-policy-wg] Re: [address-policy-wg] Re: [address-policy-wg] 2006-07 - Minimum IPv4 Assignment Window
- Previous message (by thread): [address-policy-wg] Re: [address-policy-wg] Re: [address-policy-wg] 2006-07 – Minimum IPv4 Assignment Window
- Next message (by thread): [address-policy-wg] SPAM filtering at RIPE NCC
Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
Sander Steffann
s.steffann at computel.nl
Thu Nov 9 16:06:01 CET 2006
Hi, > I only mentioned some concern about no slow-start mechanism > at all, but basically a per-LIR AW doesn't make much sense > anyways. Usuallly "older", "bigger" LIRs have quite some > "high" AW already, even if they have a high fluctuation > of LIR-contacts/hostmasters, too (students ect.) > So, personally, the current AW doesn't tell that much about > quality of Assignments made anyways - it's quite obsolete > from this p.o.v. That is true. In assignment window for new LIR's would make some sense, just to make sure that they don't do anything silly because of a misunderstanding. There is a big chance that nobody in the organisation has experience in running an LIR. They might even still be thinking in classes... (in my experience a lot of people don't read documents until they have to, so they might have ignored CIDR until now) Letting them start (for a short time) with an AW of /25 will probably make them aware :) Just some thoughts.. Sander
- Previous message (by thread): [address-policy-wg] Re: [address-policy-wg] Re: [address-policy-wg] 2006-07 – Minimum IPv4 Assignment Window
- Next message (by thread): [address-policy-wg] SPAM filtering at RIPE NCC
Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]