[address-policy-wg] 2006-02 Last Call for Comments (IPv6 Address Allocation and Assignment Policy)

On 26 Jun 2007, at 19:00, Jeroen Massar wrote:

> Also that avoids any need for ULA-C as everybody is covered.

	Non sequitur.

	Your conclusion may be true; unless you choose to expose your
	logic, it is unproven, and may even be just wishful thinking.

	I'ld really like to see a conclusion (for or against, I don't
	care) about ULA-C which didn't involve religious convictions.
	That probably belongs in another thread.


	Best regards,

	Niall O'Reilly
	University College Dublin IT Services

	PGP key ID: AE995ED9 (see www.pgp.net)
	Fingerprint: 23DC C6DE 8874 2432 2BE0 3905 7987 E48D AE99 5ED9



-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: PGP.sig
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 186 bytes
Desc: This is a digitally signed message part
URL: </ripe/mail/archives/address-policy-wg/attachments/20070627/1fd95f12/attachment.sig>