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] IXP peering lan reachability
- Previous message (by thread): [address-policy-wg] IXP peering lan reachability
- Next message (by thread): [address-policy-wg] IXP peering lan reachability
Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
Rob Evans
rhe at nosc.ja.net
Tue Oct 24 12:18:02 CEST 2017
> I'd politely suggest that this is an area that the RIPE NCC should not > get involved in, especially from the point of view of implicitly issuing > recommended practice by implying that there is a problem with doing > this. The IXP associations are better placed to gather consensus for > creating best practices, and there is no general consensus in the IXP > community on this issue. Full agreement with Nick, the (controlled) announcement or otherwise of an IXP prefix is not a registry policy issue. Cheers, Rob
- Previous message (by thread): [address-policy-wg] IXP peering lan reachability
- Next message (by thread): [address-policy-wg] IXP peering lan reachability
Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]