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/address-policy-wg@ripe.net/
[address-policy-wg] PI for IPv6 == PI for IPv4?
- Previous message (by thread): [address-policy-wg] PI for IPv6 == PI for IPv4?
- Next message (by thread): [address-policy-wg] PI for IPv6 == PI for IPv4?
Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
Adrian Czapek
adriano at rybnet.pl
Wed Aug 10 09:44:45 CEST 2011
> > Please explain Sascha. I just don't get it. IPv6 deployment isn't > hindered by the availability of PI space. At least not in the general > case. Can you give some actual examples where a problem getting PI IPv6 > space has (or is) a showstopper for IPv6 deployment? > I have an example - hosting companies can't get PI IPv6, and they are forced to become LIRs in order to get one. Discussed proposal changes nothing for them, thus, you wanted an example where getting PI IPv6 space is stopping IPv6 deployment. > > Maybe, but why does someone need IPv6 PI space to start deploying IPv6? > Because someone don't want to, or need to, to become LIR and get their PA allocation (see example above). Regards -- Adrian
- Previous message (by thread): [address-policy-wg] PI for IPv6 == PI for IPv4?
- Next message (by thread): [address-policy-wg] PI for IPv6 == PI for IPv4?
Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]