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/cooperation-wg@ripe.net/
[cooperation-wg] Internet governance
- Previous message (by thread): [cooperation-wg] Internet governance
- Next message (by thread): [cooperation-wg] Internet governance
Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
Roland Perry
roland at internetpolicyagency.com
Thu Nov 21 17:53:39 CET 2013
In message <528E1E7B.60000 at inex.ie>, at 14:53:47 on Thu, 21 Nov 2013, Nick Hilliard <nick at inex.ie> writes >> Where is the "running code" when it come to (eg) denying IXPs the right to >> have provider-independent IPv6 addresses (as was the case for some >> considerable time). > >that particular policy bug was fixed in the summer of 2001. In the 12.5 >years since then, I think we can reasonably claim that the RIPE community >has built up a vibrant interest in actively managing its addressing >policies using bottom up principals. And I don't dispute that for a moment. Currently I'm particularly interested in getting the "underbottom" (that's users and their representatives, rather than typically the layer above, their connectivity suppliers) more involved in that process. It's a bit like "civil society, but without the anticensorship flavour". -- Roland Perry
- Previous message (by thread): [cooperation-wg] Internet governance
- Next message (by thread): [cooperation-wg] Internet governance
Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]