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] IXP pool lower boundary of assignments
- Previous message (by thread): [address-policy-wg] IXP pool lower boundary of assignments
- Next message (by thread): [address-policy-wg] IXP pool lower boundary of assignments
Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
Nick Hilliard
nick at foobar.org
Tue Nov 8 14:55:41 CET 2022
Will Hargrave wrote on 08/11/2022 13:48: > If we think router vendors are in a position to reliably support v4 > AF over BGP in v6, and actually route this traffic this is kinda the problem with RFC 5549, no? I.e. it deals only with signaling rather than transport. So even if it's deployed, the IXP will still need to provide ipv4 addresses for transport purposes. Nick
- Previous message (by thread): [address-policy-wg] IXP pool lower boundary of assignments
- Next message (by thread): [address-policy-wg] IXP pool lower boundary of assignments
Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]