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/ipv6-wg@ripe.net/

[ipv6-wg] 2010-06 New Policy Proposal (Registration Requirements for IPv6 End User Assignments)

• Previous message (by thread): [ipv6-wg] 2010-06 New Policy Proposal (Registration Requirements for IPv6 End User Assignments)
• Next message (by thread): [ipv6-wg] 2010-06 New Policy Proposal (Registration Requirements for IPv6 End User Assignments)

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

Thomas Narten narten at us.ibm.com
Tue Dec 14 02:14:39 CET 2010

> A) A lot of people (including RFC 3177) claim every residential user
>  should get a /48. A few recent opinions are collected here:

RFC 3177 is old, and will hopefully soon be replaced. The current
update to it is:

http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-ietf-v6ops-3177bis-end-sites-00

That document recently completed IETF LC (with no significant
opposition) and is being processed by the IESG.

Thomas

• Previous message (by thread): [ipv6-wg] 2010-06 New Policy Proposal (Registration Requirements for IPv6 End User Assignments)
• Next message (by thread): [ipv6-wg] 2010-06 New Policy Proposal (Registration Requirements for IPv6 End User Assignments)

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

[ ipv6-wg Archives ]