[address-policy-wg] 200 customer requirements for IPv6
- Previous message (by thread): [address-policy-wg] 200 customer requirements for IPv6
- Next message (by thread): [address-policy-wg] 200 customer requirements for IPv6
Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
Pekka Savola
pekkas at netcore.fi
Thu Nov 17 20:05:22 CET 2005
On Thu, 17 Nov 2005, Tim Streater wrote: > The other network is one we are *currently* managing, EUMEDCONNECT. > It is for the Middle-eastern and North African NRENs. The intention > here is that we expect these NRENs to set up their own entity to > manage it, and go their own way, in which case we gift them the > infrastructure, which in this case has to include the address space. > We can do that for v4 as I got PI space for that. Its v6 that is the > problem. Did you actually *try* getting a separate /32 for this? RIPE NCC is known to be very reasonable towards transit networks, and I could bet good money you could get an allocation without a hitch. -- 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] 200 customer requirements for IPv6
- Next message (by thread): [address-policy-wg] 200 customer requirements for IPv6
Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]