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] ripe-587, Temporary Internet Number Assignment Policies
- Previous message (by thread): [address-policy-wg] IPv6 - Geolocation concerns
- Next message (by thread): [address-policy-wg] ripe-587, Temporary Internet Number Assignment Policies
Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
Eliot Lear
lear at cisco.com
Thu Feb 3 08:40:10 CET 2022
Jim, Daniel, I like the idea of the NCC (specifically RIPE Labs) just allocating to themselves a small block of v4 and another of v6 for experiments, and then delegating portions or the whole of the block for bounded experiments, keeping the paperwork and process to a minimum. Also, RIPE could perhaps extort a good talk out of the researchers once the results are published ;-) If someone needs a big block or a long period of time, perhaps that is something to discuss on its own, consulting people the IAB. One question I have about Randy’s proposal is the business about returning the addresses as clean or cleaner. That should be elaborated. Withdrawn routes? Sure. Worrying about reputational damage after security research or what’s in other people’s configs? Nah. Also- what does it mean re ROAs? Eliot -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: signature.asc Type: application/pgp-signature Size: 488 bytes Desc: Message signed with OpenPGP URL: </ripe/mail/archives/address-policy-wg/attachments/20220203/420e020f/attachment.sig>
- Previous message (by thread): [address-policy-wg] IPv6 - Geolocation concerns
- Next message (by thread): [address-policy-wg] ripe-587, Temporary Internet Number Assignment Policies
Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]