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] Discrepancy Between RIPE Policies on IPv4 and IPv6 Provider Independent (PI) Address Space
- Previous message (by thread): AW: [address-policy-wg] Discrepancy Between RIPE Policies on IPv4 and IPv6 Provider Independent (PI) Address Space
- Next message (by thread): [address-policy-wg] Discrepancy Between RIPE Policies on IPv4 and IPv6 Provider Independent (PI) Address Space
Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
Richard Hartmann
richih.mailinglist at gmail.com
Thu May 6 10:50:29 CEST 2010
On Thu, May 6, 2010 at 08:42, Marcus.Gerdon <Marcus.Gerdon at versatel.de> wrote: > - single address for connecting a customers server > => PI > - contained /64 (!) segment (i.e. dedicated vlan for a customers rack) > => I think somewhat of a border case, but tend to *no* PI A /64 in IPv6 is what a single address is for IPv4. This is obviously a _very_ reduced view for the sake of my argument, but I think doing this is valid, in this case. Richard
- Previous message (by thread): AW: [address-policy-wg] Discrepancy Between RIPE Policies on IPv4 and IPv6 Provider Independent (PI) Address Space
- Next message (by thread): [address-policy-wg] Discrepancy Between RIPE Policies on IPv4 and IPv6 Provider Independent (PI) Address Space
Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]