[address-policy-wg] IPv6 Policy Clarification - Initial allocation criteria "d)"
- Previous message (by thread): [address-policy-wg] IPv6 Policy Clarification - Initial allocation criteria "d)"
- Next message (by thread): [address-policy-wg] IPv6 Policy Clarification - Initial allocation criteria "d)"
Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
Pekka Savola
pekkas at netcore.fi
Fri Jun 25 07:36:52 CEST 2004
On Thu, 24 Jun 2004, Gert Doering wrote: > - try to come up with new rules for the allocation criteria, dropping > the 200-assignments part, and integrate whatever is necessary to > balance the remainder. Wasn't pretty much all of this (except one comment) based on the misconception that you'd actually have to have 200 IPv6 customers, not that you would have *potential* IPv6 customers (i.e: v4 customers, and you willing to give them service)? So I don't think there was such a strong need for removeing the rule, just if we clarified it sufficiently so that people would not (again!) interpret it too strongly. -- Pekka Savola "You each name yourselves king, yet the Netcore Oy kingdom bleeds." Systems. Networks. Security. -- George R.R. Martin: A Clash of Kings
- Previous message (by thread): [address-policy-wg] IPv6 Policy Clarification - Initial allocation criteria "d)"
- Next message (by thread): [address-policy-wg] IPv6 Policy Clarification - Initial allocation criteria "d)"
Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]