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] 2016-04 New Policy Proposal (IPv6 PI Sub-assignment Clarification)
- Previous message (by thread): [address-policy-wg] 2016-04 New Policy Proposal (IPv6 PI Sub-assignment Clarification)
- Next message (by thread): [address-policy-wg] 2016-04 New Policy Proposal (IPv6 PI Sub-assignment Clarification)
Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
Sascha Luck [ml]
apwg at c4inet.net
Fri Oct 21 18:11:49 CEST 2016
On Fri, Oct 21, 2016 at 10:15:52AM +0200, Marco Schmidt wrote: >The goal of this proposal is to define sub-assignments in IPv6 PI assignments as subnets of /64 and shorter. For some reason, the rules for end-user infrastructure are stricter than they were for ipv4. This proposal solves the issue and I therefore support it. rgds, Sascha Luck
- Previous message (by thread): [address-policy-wg] 2016-04 New Policy Proposal (IPv6 PI Sub-assignment Clarification)
- Next message (by thread): [address-policy-wg] 2016-04 New Policy Proposal (IPv6 PI Sub-assignment Clarification)
Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]