[address-policy-wg] Draft: "status:" re-evaluation
- Previous message (by thread): [address-policy-wg] Draft: "status:" re-evaluation
- Next message (by thread): [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): [address-policy-wg] Draft: "status:" re-evaluation
- Next message (by thread): [address-policy-wg] Draft: "status:" re-evaluation
Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]