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] question about IPv4 legacy and transfers - should we convert legacy to non-legacy with transfers?
- Previous message (by thread): [address-policy-wg] question about IPv4 legacy and transfers - should we convert legacy to non-legacy with transfers?
- Next message (by thread): [address-policy-wg] question about IPv4 legacy and transfers - should we convert legacy to non-legacy with transfers?
Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
Piotr Strzyzewski
Piotr.Strzyzewski at polsl.pl
Mon Jul 22 15:26:34 CEST 2019
On Mon, Jul 22, 2019 at 02:24:52PM +0100, Jim Reid wrote: > > > > On 22 Jul 2019, at 14:16, Piotr Strzyzewski via address-policy-wg <address-policy-wg at ripe.net> wrote: > > > >> > >> I belive the community should focus strongly on an accurate registry as the > >> main principle. > > > > One should remember that "the main" is distinct from "the only". > > Except when those other policies detract from the main one. If we can't maintain an accurate registry, then what's the point? IMHO, this is not the case here. Let's try not to fall in the false dilemma here. Piotr -- Piotr Strzyżewski Silesian University of Technology, Computer Centre Gliwice, Poland
- Previous message (by thread): [address-policy-wg] question about IPv4 legacy and transfers - should we convert legacy to non-legacy with transfers?
- Next message (by thread): [address-policy-wg] question about IPv4 legacy and transfers - should we convert legacy to non-legacy with transfers?
Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]