This archive is retained to ensure existing URLs remain functional. It will not contain any emails sent to this mailing list after July 1, 2024. For all messages, including those sent before and after this date, please visit the new location of the archive at https://mailman.ripe.net/archives/list/address-policy-wg@ripe.net/
[address-policy-wg] Allocation vs assignment question
- Previous message (by thread): [address-policy-wg] Allocation vs assignment question
- Next message (by thread): [address-policy-wg] Allocation vs assignment question
Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
Makc The Great
makc.the.great at gmail.com
Mon Dec 4 16:29:33 CET 2006
So, overall consensus here is like this: On 12/4/06, Amar <amar at telia.net> wrote: > > Ergo: There has not to be any connection between > subnets for each assignment. It is done > based on the proven need and not on a > physical connection between the requesters > networks. > Could you please explain then what does "Sub-allocations are intended to aid the goal of routing aggregation" phrase means in english?
- Previous message (by thread): [address-policy-wg] Allocation vs assignment question
- Next message (by thread): [address-policy-wg] Allocation vs assignment question
Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]