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] 2015-03 New Draft Document and Impact Analysis Published (Assessment Criteria for IPv6 Initial Allocation Size)
- Previous message (by thread): [address-policy-wg] 2015-03 New Draft Document and Impact Analysis Published (Assessment Criteria for IPv6 Initial Allocation Size)
- Next message (by thread): [address-policy-wg] 2015-03 New Draft Document and Impact Analysis Published (Assessment Criteria for IPv6 Initial Allocation Size)
Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
Mathew Newton
Mathew.Newton643 at official.mod.uk
Fri Jul 10 15:48:43 CEST 2015
Hi Tore, > -----Original Message----- > From: address-policy-wg [mailto:address-policy-wg-bounces at ripe.net] On > Behalf Of Tore Anderson > I'll note that both authors' LIRs (uk.mod and de.kaufland) already hold > an IPv6 /29 allocation each...so assuming the proposal was intended to > help scratch an itch of their own, so to speak, perhaps this is > simply an omission? It was our (uk.mod's) expectation/assumption that it would be possible to return an existing allocation (in an 'unused/as-new' state) and apply for another under the new criteria. Regards, Mathew
- Previous message (by thread): [address-policy-wg] 2015-03 New Draft Document and Impact Analysis Published (Assessment Criteria for IPv6 Initial Allocation Size)
- Next message (by thread): [address-policy-wg] 2015-03 New Draft Document and Impact Analysis Published (Assessment Criteria for IPv6 Initial Allocation Size)
Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]