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 ]
Rueegg, Daniel
drueegg at emea.att.com
Fri Apr 17 12:01:44 CEST 2009
It is really amazing how many unqualified comments I saw on this during the last couple of days. Seems that a lot of people on this list just see an incredible small slice of the net and believe they see the whole internet. Good luck to all those which plan to use PI space for their services and also to all those which believe they can get an IPv6 PA smaller /32 routed through all T1 ISPs. You'll sooner or later face some serious problems in the IPv6 world (if you even participate in that at all). Anyway, for me it does not matter whether this proposal gets through or not. We have a workaround and that covers us for the coming years. - I wanted to prevent others from being forced the same ugly road too but I leave it to those ISPs to get that process/rules fixed when they face the problem. I'll remove my self from this list. Dani Rueegg
- 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 ]