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] 2007-05 Discussion Period extended until 13 August 2007 (IPv6 ULA-Central)
- Previous message (by thread): [address-policy-wg] 2007-05 Discussion Period extended until 13 August 2007 (IPv6 ULA-Central)
- Next message (by thread): [address-policy-wg] 2007-04 Last Call for Comments (IANA Policy for Allocation of ASN Blocks to RIRs)
Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
JORDI PALET MARTINEZ
jordi.palet at consulintel.es
Mon Jul 16 23:46:58 CEST 2007
Nobody knows what will be the result of the IETF process, and this is why I can't provide a new version of the proposal at this stage or decide if need to be withdrawn or whatever, so I need to put it "on-hold". If you read the PDP, you will realize that it doesn't allow a proposal to be put "on-hold", once the discussion phase is over, you either go for a new version, the review phase, or extend the discussion period. This discussion period extension works as a kind of "on-hold", especially if the author and/or other folks avoid discussing it, and that's what I'm doing being silent :-) Regards, Jordi > De: Roger Jorgensen <rogerj at jorgensen.no> > Responder a: <address-policy-wg-admin at ripe.net> > Fecha: Mon, 16 Jul 2007 23:09:12 +0200 (CEST) > Para: Gert Doering <gert at space.net> > CC: <michael.dillon at bt.com>, <address-policy-wg at ripe.net> > Asunto: Re: [address-policy-wg] 2007-05 Discussion Period extended until 13 > August 2007 (IPv6 ULA-Central) > > On Mon, 16 Jul 2007, Gert Doering wrote: > <snip> >> >> The reason for extending the discussion period is *specifically* to >> see what will happen in the IETF, and then decide how to go ahead with >> this proposal. If the IETF goes for "yes, ULA-C is a good thing", then >> we can adapt this proposal accordingly - if they go for "ULA-C is not >> going to happen! never ever!" Jordi can withdraw the proposal, and it >> will be history. > > The point is that what are being discussed are quite different from what > the current probposal ( > http://www.ripe.net/ripe/policies/proposals/2007-05.html ) says. It is > probably that both the name, size and usage will probably be different. It > is in short a quite different scenario. > > It will probably also outline a different assignment regime from the > ULA-block too. > > > > -- > > ------------------------------ > Roger Jorgensen | - ROJO9-RIPE - RJ85P-NORID > roger at jorgensen.no | - IPv6 is The Key! > ------------------------------------------------------- > ********************************************** The IPv6 Portal: http://www.ipv6tf.org Bye 6Bone. Hi, IPv6 ! http://www.ipv6day.org This electronic message contains information which may be privileged or confidential. The information is intended to be for the use of the individual(s) named above. If you are not the intended recipient be aware that any disclosure, copying, distribution or use of the contents of this information, including attached files, is prohibited.
- Previous message (by thread): [address-policy-wg] 2007-05 Discussion Period extended until 13 August 2007 (IPv6 ULA-Central)
- Next message (by thread): [address-policy-wg] 2007-04 Last Call for Comments (IANA Policy for Allocation of ASN Blocks to RIRs)
Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]