[off-topic] Re: [address-policy-wg] 2008-01 Moved to Review Phase (Assigning IPv6 PI to Every Inetnum Holder)
- Previous message (by thread): [off-topic] Re: [address-policy-wg] 2008-01 Moved to Review Phase (Assigning IPv6 PI to Every Inetnum Holder)
- Next message (by thread): [off-topic] Re: [address-policy-wg] 2008-01 Moved to Review Phase (Assigning IPv6 PI to Every Inetnum Holder)
Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
Pim van Pelt
pim at ipng.nl
Wed Mar 26 09:27:41 CET 2008
On Tue, Mar 25, 2008 at 09:39:51AM +0000, bmanning at vacation.karoshi.com wrote: | "we" in this case is me and the mouse in my pocket. | and yes, this is tossing the /64 stricture. the house | network is nicely tucked into a /112 - although we advertize | a /48 covering prefix so it will get transit. good for you, bill. you get to do things different just because you can AND the world gets to see you adhere to what we collectively regard as good practice. I don't think I have your /48 in my routing tables. Sorry it didn't work out. -- ---------- - - - - -+- - - - - ---------- Pim van Pelt Email: pim at ipng.nl http://www.ipng.nl/ IPv6 Deployment -----------------------------------------------
- Previous message (by thread): [off-topic] Re: [address-policy-wg] 2008-01 Moved to Review Phase (Assigning IPv6 PI to Every Inetnum Holder)
- Next message (by thread): [off-topic] Re: [address-policy-wg] 2008-01 Moved to Review Phase (Assigning IPv6 PI to Every Inetnum Holder)
Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]