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] What we want to be acceptable in IPv4 PI and IPv6 PI?
- Previous message (by thread): [address-policy-wg] What we want to be acceptable in IPv4 PI and IPv6 PI?
- Next message (by thread): [address-policy-wg] What we want to be acceptable in IPv4 PI and IPv6 PI?
Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
Gert Doering
gert at space.net
Wed Oct 17 15:12:15 CEST 2018
Hi,
On Wed, Oct 17, 2018 at 12:08:49PM +0200, JORDI PALET MARTINEZ via address-policy-wg wrote:
> Trying to look into my presentation today from a higher-level perspective ...
>
> What is the expected usage of IPv4 and IPv6 PI?
We should stop caring about IPv4 PI, as that is long gone.
So the focus needs to be "what is an IPv6 PI policy that is useful for
the RIPE region".
Wether or not this is the same as what we had for IPv4 in the past is
only of historic relevance.
Gert Doering
-- APWG chair
--
have you enabled IPv6 on something today...?
SpaceNet AG Vorstand: Sebastian v. Bomhard, Michael Emmer
Joseph-Dollinger-Bogen 14 Aufsichtsratsvors.: A. Grundner-Culemann
D-80807 Muenchen HRB: 136055 (AG Muenchen)
Tel: +49 (0)89/32356-444 USt-IdNr.: DE813185279
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 833 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: </ripe/mail/archives/address-policy-wg/attachments/20181017/cb8de046/attachment.sig>
- Previous message (by thread): [address-policy-wg] What we want to be acceptable in IPv4 PI and IPv6 PI?
- Next message (by thread): [address-policy-wg] What we want to be acceptable in IPv4 PI and IPv6 PI?
Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]