[address-policy-wg] 2009-05 New Policy Proposal (Multiple IPv6 /32 Allocations for LIRs)
- Previous message (by thread): [address-policy-wg] 2009-05 New Policy Proposal (Multiple IPv6 /32 Allocations for LIRs)
- Next message (by thread): [address-policy-wg] 2009-05 New Policy Proposal (Multiple IPv6 /32 Allocations for LIRs)
Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
Piotr Strzyzewski
Piotr.Strzyzewski at polsl.pl
Wed Apr 15 11:12:13 CEST 2009
On Wed, Apr 15, 2009 at 10:54:38AM +0200, Remco van Mook wrote: > I'm sorry but that goes back to my previous e-mail - a request for an AS is > a request for an AS and I don't see how that should be related in any way to So, as I understand, are you going to say, that RIPE NCC is assigning more than one/few ASNs to the same unique LIR just "for free"? If not (I hope so ;-) ), why we couldn't base new policy (IPv6 allocations) on other solid policy and practice (ASN assignments)? It's like in math - you must (or at least should ;-) ) base one thing on another. Piotr -- gucio -> Piotr Strzyżewski E-mail: Piotr.Strzyzewski at polsl.pl
- Previous message (by thread): [address-policy-wg] 2009-05 New Policy Proposal (Multiple IPv6 /32 Allocations for LIRs)
- Next message (by thread): [address-policy-wg] 2009-05 New Policy Proposal (Multiple IPv6 /32 Allocations for LIRs)
Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]