[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 ]
Kurt Erik Lindqvist
kurtis at kurtis.pp.se
Fri Nov 18 17:34:20 CET 2005
On 18 nov 2005, at 17.13, Randy Bush wrote: >>> 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. >>> >> So what you say is "keep the current rule as the NCC will disobey it >> anyway". Why can't we just fix the broken policy.... >> > > how much should policy be twisted to cover up broken/incomplete > technology? the need will be continual and infinite. You know Randy, you don't HAVE to do v6. You can stay at v4...:-) - kurtis -
- 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 ]