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] concept document: IPv6 PA/PI unification
- Previous message (by thread): [address-policy-wg] 2011-05 New Policy Proposal (Safeguarding future IXPs with IPv4 space)
- Next message (by thread): [address-policy-wg] 2011-04 New Policy Proposal (Extension of the Minimum Size for IPv6 Initial Allocation)
Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
Dan Luedtke
maildanrl at googlemail.com
Tue Nov 1 17:32:01 CET 2011
On Sun, Oct 30, 2011 at 12:08 PM, Randy Bush <randy at psg.com> wrote: > o oh, dtag wants another /2, yep they eat them regularly, and we just > do not have the depth to look deeply into their net design. fine > > o this weenie that wants a /48, who the heck are they and have they > any net design That's how I felt like it is now, so it cannot get worse. The most important point for me is, that larger blocks will be more expensive than the small (/48) ones. If the costs are shared equally, the "weenies" pay the org overhead for LIRs. Gerts 50/100/200 EUR plan is the way to go. just my 2 cents. regards, danrl -- regards. danrl -- Dan Luedtke http://www.danrl.de
- Previous message (by thread): [address-policy-wg] 2011-05 New Policy Proposal (Safeguarding future IXPs with IPv4 space)
- Next message (by thread): [address-policy-wg] 2011-04 New Policy Proposal (Extension of the Minimum Size for IPv6 Initial Allocation)
Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]