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 ]
Radu-Adrian FEURDEAN
ripe-wgs at radu-adrian.feurdean.net
Sat Apr 23 22:07:49 CEST 2016
On Sat, Apr 23, 2016, at 04:53, Randy Bush wrote: > > For me, the issue is that right now we are in a "please suffer, the > > solution is not working yet" situation. > > what solution is not working for you? Commercially, IPv6 does not work. IPv4 does, it's even required. Companies (non-IT ones) don't care about IPv6 yet. They just want their fixed IPv4 or IPv4 block (/29 and up) for their internet connections - can't provide it, somebody else (usually big/old player) can. > randy, running v6 commercially since '97 Like selling IPv6-based services with no or degraded IPv4 ?
- 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 ]