[address-policy-wg] Re: [ipv6-wg] IPv6 micro allocation or something else?
- Previous message (by thread): [address-policy-wg] Re: [ipv6-wg] IPv6 micro allocation or something else?
- Next message (by thread): [address-policy-wg] Re: [ipv6-wg] IPv6 micro allocation or something else?
Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
Tim Streater
tim.streater at dante.org.uk
Mon Nov 14 14:41:48 CET 2005
At 11:19 14/11/2005, Jørgen Hovland wrote: >So we are back at the beginning; >I say no to anycast PI for TLDs/ccTLDs. I don't believe it is a special case >so it doesn't need a special policy. TLDs/ccTLDs could/should however be >used as an argument to allow v6 PI prefixes in general. >V6 PI compared to v4 surely is a showstopper for many, or at least for some. It's a showstopper for us on one of the networks we manage. We can't get V6 PI for it like we could v4 PI. -- Tim
- Previous message (by thread): [address-policy-wg] Re: [ipv6-wg] IPv6 micro allocation or something else?
- Next message (by thread): [address-policy-wg] Re: [ipv6-wg] IPv6 micro allocation or something else?
Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]