[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 ]
Oliver Bartels
oliver at bartels.de
Mon Apr 24 10:52:43 CEST 2006
On Mon, 24 Apr 2006 09:10:26 +0200, Marc van Selm wrote: >> so, let's switch to discussing >> >> http://www.ripe.net/ripe/policies/proposals/2006-01.html > >I would support this policy proposal. > >This would be a sound alternative to those that need to be a LIR today but do >not really have to be a LIR but only require address-space that does not tie >them with 1 or 2 providers "for life" and gives them the possibility to have >global multi-homing (so for example, 2 access points to the Net: 1x US, 1x >Europe and a private global corporate network to provide internal >connectivity). This argument is absolutely correct, the impact on the BGP table will be negligible and can - as proven by IPv4 - be handled by modern routing hardware, thus: I support your argument and the proposal, too. Best Regards Oliver Bartels Oliver Bartels F+E + Bartels System GmbH + 85435 Erding, Germany oliver at bartels.de + http://www.bartels.de + Tel. +49-8122-9729-0
- 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 ]