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] 2008-01 New Policy Proposal (Assigning IPv6 PI to Every Inetnum Holder)
- Previous message (by thread): [address-policy-wg] 2008-01 New Policy Proposal (Assigning IPv6 PI to Every Inetnum Holder)
- Next message (by thread): [address-policy-wg] 2008-01 New Policy Proposal (Assigning IPv6 PI to Every Inetnum Holder)
Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
Per Heldal
heldal at eml.cc
Thu Jan 17 18:08:21 CET 2008
On Thu, 2008-01-17 at 11:39 +0100, Marco Hogewoning wrote: > On Jan 17, 2008, at 10:42 AM, Per Heldal wrote: > > Should we allow PI to be used to provide transit? > > If not, would you as an ISP build your network using PI? > > > Is there an easy way to enforce people not doing it ? Maybe not today, but those who violate such terms have none other than themselves to blame if they later find themselves up sh*t creek without a paddle (ip-block) once the community has a decent mechanism to revoke allocations. //per
- Previous message (by thread): [address-policy-wg] 2008-01 New Policy Proposal (Assigning IPv6 PI to Every Inetnum Holder)
- Next message (by thread): [address-policy-wg] 2008-01 New Policy Proposal (Assigning IPv6 PI to Every Inetnum Holder)
Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]