[address-policy-wg] 2011-05 New Policy Proposal (Safeguarding future IXPs with IPv4 space)
- Previous message (by thread): [address-policy-wg] 2011-05 New Policy Proposal (Safeguarding future IXPs with IPv4 space)
- Next message (by thread): [address-policy-wg] 2011-05 New Policy Proposal (Safeguarding future IXPs with IPv4 space)
Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
Babak Farrokhi
babak at farrokhi.net
Wed Oct 26 08:19:02 CEST 2011
Hi, I support this policy. Babak On Oct 25, 2011, at 10:13 PM, Andy Davidson wrote: > > > Hi there, > > On 25 Oct 2011, at 15:57, Dan Luedtke <maildanrl at googlemail.com> wrote: > >> I support this proposal. >> >> One question: >> Is it the same /16 in 5.6.2 as in 5.6.3? >> Or does that mean that two /16 will be held back? > > Hi > > Thanks for your support. > > An additional /16 is proposed. > > Andy >
- Previous message (by thread): [address-policy-wg] 2011-05 New Policy Proposal (Safeguarding future IXPs with IPv4 space)
- Next message (by thread): [address-policy-wg] 2011-05 New Policy Proposal (Safeguarding future IXPs with IPv4 space)
Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]