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] IPv6 PI
- Previous message (by thread): [address-policy-wg] IPv6 PI
- Next message (by thread): [address-policy-wg] IPv6 PI
Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
Niall O'Reilly
Niall.oReilly at ucd.ie
Wed Jul 15 11:45:47 CEST 2009
Stream Service || Mark Scholten wrote: > I didn't say they don't qualify in the current policy. I asked IF they > qualify yet or not. This is because some people say yes they qualify and > some others say they don't qualify. IM[...]HO, as long as this uncertainty exists, which is an uncertainty as to whether there is a problem, it will be impossible to make a convincing case for a policy proposal, for the simple reason that any such proposal would not address a known problem. You say that "some people say" one thing or another. You can test what the current policy allows by making a request through your chosen LIR to the RIPE NCC. Then, when you have an answer and (in case of refusal) an explanation, you'll be in a position to state any problem that you believe exists. IHTH VBR, mvg, etc, Niall O'Reilly
- Previous message (by thread): [address-policy-wg] IPv6 PI
- Next message (by thread): [address-policy-wg] IPv6 PI
Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]