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]/

[apnic-talk] Status field for inet6num objects

Previous message (by thread): [apnic-talk] Status field for inet6num objects
Next message (by thread): [apnic-talk] Status field for inet6num objects

Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]

Geoff Huston gih at telstra.net
Wed Jun 12 06:00:50 CEST 2002

>To clarify, the values that APNIC would prefer to use are:
>
>ALLOCATED PORTABLE
>ALLOCATED NON-PORTABLE
>ASSIGNED PORTABLE
>ASSIGNED NON-PORTABLE
>
>As I mentioned before, these values would be consistent with those in
>IPv4 (which take effect in August when the migration to version 3 of the
>RIPE database is complete).
>
>Comments?

I would be in favour of this clarity in the field regarding PORTABLE and 
NON_PORTABLE.
However, the distinction between "ALLOCATED" and "ASSIGNED" is perhaps a 
bit subtle.

regards,

   Geoff

Previous message (by thread): [apnic-talk] Status field for inet6num objects
Next message (by thread): [apnic-talk] Status field for inet6num objects

Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]

[ db-wg Archives ]