[address-policy-wg] 2006-05 New Draft Document Published (PI Assignment Size)
- Previous message (by thread): [address-policy-wg] 2006-05 New Draft Document Published (PI Assignment Size)
- Next message (by thread): [address-policy-wg] 2006-05 New Draft Document Published (PI Assignment Size)
Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
Wilfried Woeber, UniVie/ACOnet
Woeber at CC.UniVie.ac.at
Wed Feb 14 19:17:51 CET 2007
You are right, thanks for spotting it! It should have read "...receiving PA is not raised to /24, too... Wilfried. Gert Doering wrote: > Hi, > > On Wed, Feb 14, 2007 at 05:41:39PM +0000, Wilfried Woeber, UniVie/ACOnet wrote: > >>- on a more general note, as long as the minimum assignemt size for customers >>receiving PA is raised to /24, too, this proposal is a real incentive to go >>for PI instead of PA. > > > A "not" is missing somewhere in this sentence, but I think the intended > meaning is clear :) > > (not commenting on the policy proposal itself) > > Gert Doering > -- APWG chair
- Previous message (by thread): [address-policy-wg] 2006-05 New Draft Document Published (PI Assignment Size)
- Next message (by thread): [address-policy-wg] 2006-05 New Draft Document Published (PI Assignment Size)
Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]