[address-policy-wg] IPv4-HD-Ratio proposal
- Previous message (by thread): [address-policy-wg] IPv4-HD-Ratio proposal
- Next message (by thread): [address-policy-wg] IPv4-HD-Ratio proposal
Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
Thor-Henrik Kvandahl
thk at telenor.net
Tue May 2 13:03:43 CEST 2006
On Tue, 2 May 2006 Michael.Dillon at btradianz.com wrote: > Perhaps someone can clear up my understanding on the ETNO > question. > > Torunn Narvestad <tna at telenor.net> wrote on 30/04/2006 19:44:35: > > I do not at all support this policy proposal. > > > >And I also have to agree with Gert Doering who said in the address > policy > > >WG that there has been very quiet around this proposal, and that the > > >reason for this can be that ETNO claims thay "unanimously support this > > >proposal". > > According to this page: http://www.etno.be/Default.aspx?tabid=1239 > Telenor is a member of ETNO. Does this mean that ETNO has > falsely claimed unanimous support among its members? > Or has Telenor changed its mind? In my email I emphasized that I expressed my *personal* opinion. -- Thor-Henrik Kvandahl
- Previous message (by thread): [address-policy-wg] IPv4-HD-Ratio proposal
- Next message (by thread): [address-policy-wg] IPv4-HD-Ratio proposal
Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]