[address-policy-wg] RE: Question
- Previous message (by thread): [address-policy-wg] RE: Question
- Next message (by thread): [address-policy-wg] RE: Question
Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
Sascha Lenz
slz at baycix.de
Thu Apr 20 15:24:38 CEST 2006
Hi, Gert Doering schrieb: > Hi, > > On Thu, Apr 20, 2006 at 04:14:47PM +0300, Pekka Savola wrote: >> I wouldn't recommend advertising more specifics to anyone... and >> again, I consider that a feature :-) > > Well, the combination of "no PI", "no working non-PI/BGP-multihoming > solution" and "PA+BGP multihoming not working either" is certainly > not something that makes currently-multihomed customers want to move to > IPv6... so, let's switch to discussing http://www.ripe.net/ripe/policies/proposals/2006-01.html :-) P.S.: The question is, if any Prefix longer than /32 makes any sense at all after years of propagating "/32 and shorter only!!!" - you can't force anyone to undo his filter descisions, let alone fix orphaned IPv6 setups (similar to the good old IPv4-IANA-reserverd-space-filter problematic). -- ======================================================================== = Sascha Lenz SLZ-RIPE slz at baycix.de = = Network Operations = = BayCIX GmbH, Landshut * PGP public Key on demand * = ========================================================================
- Previous message (by thread): [address-policy-wg] RE: Question
- Next message (by thread): [address-policy-wg] RE: Question
Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]