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] 2016-03 New Policy Proposal (Locking Down the Final /8 Policy)
- Previous message (by thread): [address-policy-wg] 2016-03 New Policy Proposal (Locking Down the Final /8 Policy)
- Next message (by thread): [address-policy-wg] 2016-03 New Policy Proposal (Locking Down the Final /8 Policy)
Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
Jim Reid
jim at rfc1035.com
Tue Jun 7 01:14:52 CEST 2016
> On 6 Jun 2016, at 23:22, Elvis Daniel Velea <elvis at v4escrow.net> wrote: > > Hi, > On 6/7/16 1:17 AM, Jim Reid wrote: >>> On 6 Jun 2016, at 22:54, Aleksey Bulgakov <aleksbulgakov at gmail.com> >>> wrote: >>> >>> Why are we talking about 185./8 only? >>> >> We are not. You might be though. :-) > Why are we still talking about this proposal? I was under the impression that it will be withdrawn soon after the RIPE Meeting. I was only explaining what resources are covered by the current policy (ie last /8). Nothing to do with 2016-03. That proposal’s deader than Elvis. Not you obviously, the other one who played Vegas a lot in the 70s. :-)
- Previous message (by thread): [address-policy-wg] 2016-03 New Policy Proposal (Locking Down the Final /8 Policy)
- Next message (by thread): [address-policy-wg] 2016-03 New Policy Proposal (Locking Down the Final /8 Policy)
Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]