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]/
[db-wg] Re: [address-policy-wg] Draft: "status:" re-evaluation
- Previous message (by thread): [db-wg] Re: [address-policy-wg] Draft: "status:" re-evaluation
- Next message (by thread): [db-wg] Re: [address-policy-wg] Draft: "status:" re-evaluation
Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
Stephen Burley
sburley at africonnect.com
Wed Aug 13 17:27:55 CEST 2003
> >I disagree. Your customer should request a seperate "SUB-ALLOCATED PA" >block for his customer or otherwise if he want's to look like being >independent to his customer, he should become RIPE member. I hardly >can't see advantages of making sub-sub-allocations (maybe you could >point them out?). Oh i wish i had access to my old mail that i sent to this list. There is an argument for this but i fits the multi-national internet registry (MIR) structure much better. It is not necessarily for your customer but more a way of trying to control your internal routing tables. Does anyone have a copy of the MIR proposal they could repost. Which may help explain. Regards Stephen Burley Internet Communications consultant Africonnect
- Previous message (by thread): [db-wg] Re: [address-policy-wg] Draft: "status:" re-evaluation
- Next message (by thread): [db-wg] Re: [address-policy-wg] Draft: "status:" re-evaluation
Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
[ db-wg Archives ]