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] IPv4 reserved space
- Previous message (by thread): [address-policy-wg] IPv4 reserved space
- Next message (by thread): [address-policy-wg] IPv4 reserved space
Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
Mikael Abrahamsson
swmike at swm.pp.se
Tue Jun 14 07:36:56 CEST 2016
On Tue, 14 Jun 2016, Arash Naderpour wrote: > My question is that is this working group the right place to discuss > about the 240/3 or it should be done in higher level like between RIRs > or IANA? You need to bring it to the IETF. IANA would most likely do what IETF asks it to do, and then the RIRs would follow suit. As was stated before (check out the link to the IETF draft, I'd imagine if you follow that trail you'll find discussions as well), the IETF took a look at this in 2008 or so, and it was deemed to be not practically feasible way of solving the problem. I'd say this hasn't changed. So most likely, if you go there and pitch the idea, you'll get the same reaction as you did here. -- Mikael Abrahamsson email: swmike at swm.pp.se
- Previous message (by thread): [address-policy-wg] IPv4 reserved space
- Next message (by thread): [address-policy-wg] IPv4 reserved space
Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]