[address-policy-wg] Revised 2006-01 set back to Discussion Phase (Provider Independent (PI) IPv6 Assignments for End User Organisations)
- Next message (by thread): [address-policy-wg] Revised 2006-01 set back to Discussion Phase (Provider Independent (PI) IPv6 Assignments for End User Organisations)
Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
Andy Davidson
andy at nosignal.org
Tue Dec 2 11:02:20 CET 2008
On 25 Nov 2008, at 18:20, Nick Hilliard wrote: > Ana Matic wrote: >> We encourage you to review this policy proposal and send your >> comments >> to <address-policy-wg at ripe.net> before 23 December 2008. I support this proposal. > - while a requirement for multihoming is useful, it should be made > clear > during implementation that this is not necessarily a requirement for > multihoming using ASNs and BGP on the public Internet I agree with Nick. Andy
- Next message (by thread): [address-policy-wg] Revised 2006-01 set back to Discussion Phase (Provider Independent (PI) IPv6 Assignments for End User Organisations)
Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]