[address-policy-wg] What we want to be acceptable in IPv4 PI and IPv6 PI?

Hi,

On Wed, Oct 17, 2018 at 04:24:15PM +0200, Randy Bush wrote:
> > 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.
> 
> after all, as humans have proven time and time again, we have nothing
> to learn from history :)

This is not what I said and not what I meant.  I just see the attempt
to keep IPv6 PI policy in sync with something that does no longer exist
as a waste of our collective time.

Looking at possible ways IPv4 PI was and is used and using that as 
additional data to make good IPv6 PI policy is, of course, useful :-)

Gert Doering
-- 
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/b11a0793/attachment.sig>