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] 2014-04 New Draft Document and Impact Analysis Published (Removing IPv6 Requirement for Receiving Space from the Final /8)
- Previous message (by thread): [address-policy-wg] 2014-04 New Draft Document and Impact Analysis Published (Removing IPv6 Requirement for Receiving Space from the Final /8)
- Next message (by thread): [address-policy-wg] 2014-04 New Draft Document and Impact Analysis Published (Removing IPv6 Requirement for Receiving Space from the Final /8)
Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
Peter Koch
pk at DENIC.DE
Sun Dec 14 19:58:44 CET 2014
On Wed, Dec 10, 2014 at 08:02:10PM +0100, Gert Doering wrote: > So did you actually *deploy* IPv6, as in "every new service you run and > install has IPv6 on it, every new product you build supports IPv6", or > did you just *get* an IPv6 block, put it on a shelf, and leave it there? it appears to me this is asking for more than what was aimed at. If memory serves the idea was to get the message through, even by pushing the issue through LIRs' internal escalation chains. Now, there are some odd conditions with PI holders that need attention and change, but the proposal declares defeat for a non-goal of the current policy. -Peter
- Previous message (by thread): [address-policy-wg] 2014-04 New Draft Document and Impact Analysis Published (Removing IPv6 Requirement for Receiving Space from the Final /8)
- Next message (by thread): [address-policy-wg] 2014-04 New Draft Document and Impact Analysis Published (Removing IPv6 Requirement for Receiving Space from the Final /8)
Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]