[address-policy-wg] IPv6 assignment for the RIPE meetingnetwork
- Previous message (by thread): [address-policy-wg] IPv6 assignment for the RIPE meetingnetwork
- Next message (by thread): [address-policy-wg] IPv6 assignment for the RIPE meetingnetwork
Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
Randy Bush
randy at psg.com
Wed Dec 3 07:59:55 CET 2008
Leo Vegoda wrote: > On 02/12/2008 11:48, "Randy Bush" <randy at psg.com> wrote: > >> Elisa Jasinska wrote: >>> I can only second Niels here. While organizing conferences and events >>> with network infrastructure myself, I can tell that it is a hassle to >>> re-arrange temporary PI every time... so I do see the incentive. But why >>> should the NCC be a special case and no one else? >> perhaps someone could phrase the general case? > > I thought 2006-01 is the general case. If it's not, I'd appreciate an > explanation of why it cannot be. i suspect that the ncc, perhaps andrei, would be the one to answer this, not i. but i can see having a meeting net address (4 and 6) and asn set lying around for folk to use, with some way to grab/schedule the token for two weeks (one setup and one show). randy
- Previous message (by thread): [address-policy-wg] IPv6 assignment for the RIPE meetingnetwork
- Next message (by thread): [address-policy-wg] IPv6 assignment for the RIPE meetingnetwork
Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]