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] 2015-05 New Policy Proposal (Revision of Last /8 Allocation Criteria)
- Previous message (by thread): [address-policy-wg] 2015-05 New Policy Proposal (Revision of Last /8 Allocation Criteria)
- Next message (by thread): [address-policy-wg] 2015-05 New Policy Proposal (Revision of Last /8 Allocation Criteria)
Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
Erik Bais
erik at bais.name
Tue Oct 20 16:28:53 CEST 2015
> first, i think all LIRs with POCs whose family name begins with B should get a /16 I fully agree on that.. Erik -----Oorspronkelijk bericht----- Van: address-policy-wg [mailto:address-policy-wg-bounces at ripe.net] Namens Randy Bush Verzonden: dinsdag 20 oktober 2015 16:27 Aan: James Blessing <james.blessing at despres.co.uk> CC: Address Policy Working Group <address-policy-wg at ripe.net> Onderwerp: Re: [address-policy-wg] 2015-05 New Policy Proposal (Revision of Last /8 Allocation Criteria) >> https://www.ripe.net/participate/policies/proposals/2015-05 > Can we limit it this to a /X to see what the impact is before throwing > the entire remaining v4 space under a bus? first, i think all LIRs with POCs whose family name begins with B should get a /16 randy
- Previous message (by thread): [address-policy-wg] 2015-05 New Policy Proposal (Revision of Last /8 Allocation Criteria)
- Next message (by thread): [address-policy-wg] 2015-05 New Policy Proposal (Revision of Last /8 Allocation Criteria)
Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]