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] 2006-05 New Draft Document Published (PI Assignment Size)
- Previous message (by thread): [address-policy-wg] 2006-05 New Draft Document Published (PI Assignment Size)
- Next message (by thread): [address-policy-wg] 2006-05 New Draft Document Published (PI Assignment Size)
Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
James Blessing
james.blessing at despres.co.uk
Thu Oct 21 13:48:58 CEST 2010
On 21 October 2010 12:36, Emilio Madaio <emadaio at ripe.net> wrote: > http://ripe.net/ripe/policies/proposals/2006-05.html Either I'm going mental or doesn't the line: "Cumulatively, no more than 248 additional IPv4 addresses may be assigned to any particular End User for the purposes outlined in section 6.10." make the proposal completely pointless J -- James Blessing 07989 039 476
- Previous message (by thread): [address-policy-wg] 2006-05 New Draft Document Published (PI Assignment Size)
- Next message (by thread): [address-policy-wg] 2006-05 New Draft Document Published (PI Assignment Size)
Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]