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] 2009-05 New Policy Proposal (Multiple IPv6 /32 Allocations for LIRs)
- Previous message (by thread): [address-policy-wg] 2009-05 New Policy Proposal (Multiple IPv6 /32 Allocations for LIRs)
- Next message (by thread): [address-policy-wg] 2009-05 New Policy Proposal (Multiple IPv6 /32 Allocations for LIRs)
Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
Leo Vegoda
leo.vegoda at icann.org
Wed Apr 15 18:02:06 CEST 2009
On 15/04/2009 2:34, "Marco Hogewoning" <marcoh at marcoh.net> wrote: [...] > Let's assume you have a seperate entity in your company, which > operates in a different geographical region under it's own AS and > routing policy. Only one company (the holding for instance) is an LIR > in the current situation. > > How do you solve this at the moment iin IPv4-land ? Good question. Isn't the normal answer to open a separate LIR for the separate business unit? Regards, Leo Vegoda
- Previous message (by thread): [address-policy-wg] 2009-05 New Policy Proposal (Multiple IPv6 /32 Allocations for LIRs)
- Next message (by thread): [address-policy-wg] 2009-05 New Policy Proposal (Multiple IPv6 /32 Allocations for LIRs)
Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]