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 Discussion Period extended until 13 May 2016 (Last /8 Allocation Criteria Revision)
- Previous message (by thread): [address-policy-wg] 2015-05 Discussion Period extended until 13 May 2016 (Last /8 Allocation Criteria Revision)
- Next message (by thread): [address-policy-wg] 2015-05 Discussion Period extended until 13 May 2016 (Last /8 Allocation Criteria Revision)
Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
Nick Hilliard
nick at foobar.org
Fri Apr 22 18:00:16 CEST 2016
Radu-Adrian FEURDEAN wrote: > I do understand that. I just do not agree with the "as long as possible, > no matter what" approach. > For me, the issue is that right now we are in a "please suffer, the > solution is not working yet" situation. and your solution is that you want future market entrants to suffer more than you're suffering now because there will be no address space whatsoever left for them? Nick
- Previous message (by thread): [address-policy-wg] 2015-05 Discussion Period extended until 13 May 2016 (Last /8 Allocation Criteria Revision)
- Next message (by thread): [address-policy-wg] 2015-05 Discussion Period extended until 13 May 2016 (Last /8 Allocation Criteria Revision)
Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]