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 ]
Jasper Jans
Jasper.Jans at espritxb.nl
Wed Aug 10 12:24:15 CEST 2011
| That would be an option, adding the requirement for Dual Homing or | existing IPv4 PI would seem to solve the issue - it might even | increase the number of v4 PI requests and speed depletion which some | would see as a good thing. Indeed - the backdoor into IPv6 PI is getting IPv4 PI. This is a limited time only kind of deal since IPv4 is nearly depleted so we know this change will not let too much new PI space slip in for people that not have it today, but will allow organisations to move forward with IPv6 deployments that have IPv4 PI today already. J. Op dit e-mailbericht is een disclaimer van toepassing, welke te vinden is op http://www.espritxb.nl/disclaimer
- 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 ]