[address-policy-wg] 2011-02 New Draft Document Published (Removal of multihomed requirement for IPv6 PI)
- Previous message (by thread): [address-policy-wg] 2011-02 New Draft Document Published (Removal of multihomed requirement for IPv6 PI)
- Next message (by thread): [address-policy-wg] 2011-02 New Draft Document Published (Removal of multihomed requirement for IPv6 PI)
Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
Turchanyi Geza
turchanyi.geza at gmail.com
Tue Jul 12 20:25:58 CEST 2011
Hello Florian, On Mon, Jul 11, 2011 at 9:53 AM, Florian Weimer <fweimer at bfk.de> wrote: > * Turchanyi Geza: > > > The potential cost of applying more staff at the RIRs like RIPE NCC is > just > > one issue. The more important issue is that all the line cards of the > core > > routers should be replaced if we can not limit the grows of the > forwarding > > tables (FIB)s. AND IPv4 address space trading allready might create > problems > > concerning the grows. > > The RIPE NCC is not an Internet service provider, so this aspect is not > relevant to RIPE NCC operations, and it does not justify interference > from the board. > > When I started to work for the Internet development in 1991 it was a slogan what caught me: Think globally, act locally! Whatever hat I would wear I would like to see a little bit longer and wider than the hat would suggest. Best, Géza -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: <https://lists.ripe.net/ripe/mail/archives/address-policy-wg/attachments/20110712/82cdc737/attachment.html>
- Previous message (by thread): [address-policy-wg] 2011-02 New Draft Document Published (Removal of multihomed requirement for IPv6 PI)
- Next message (by thread): [address-policy-wg] 2011-02 New Draft Document Published (Removal of multihomed requirement for IPv6 PI)
Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]