[address-policy-wg] 2012-10 New Policy Proposal (Extension of IPv6 /32 to /29 on a per-allocation vs per-LIR basis)
- Previous message (by thread): [address-policy-wg] 2012-10 New Policy Proposal (Extension of IPv6 /32 to /29 on a per-allocation vs per-LIR basis)
- Next message (by thread): [address-policy-wg] 2012-10 New Policy Proposal (Extension of IPv6 /32 to /29 on a per-allocation vs per-LIR basis)
Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
Sascha Pollok
sp at iphh.net
Mon Dec 31 20:56:36 CET 2012
I also support this proposal. It does not make sense otherwise. Safe migration everyone! Sascha Mike Simkins <mps31.ripe at gmail.com> schrieb: >Support > > >On 31 Dec 2012, at 10:12, Emilio Madaio wrote: > >> >> Dear Colleagues, >> >> >> A proposed change to RIPE Document ripe-552, "IPv6 Address Allocation >> and Assignment Policy", is now available for discussion. >> >> >> You can find the full proposal at: >> >> https://www.ripe.net/ripe/policies/proposals/2012-10 >> >> We encourage you to review this proposal and send your comments to >> <address-policy-wg at ripe.net> before 28 January 2013. >> >> Regards >> >> Emilio Madaio >> Policy Development Officer >> RIPE NCC >> >> -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: <https://lists.ripe.net/ripe/mail/archives/address-policy-wg/attachments/20121231/1f81aecd/attachment.html>
- Previous message (by thread): [address-policy-wg] 2012-10 New Policy Proposal (Extension of IPv6 /32 to /29 on a per-allocation vs per-LIR basis)
- Next message (by thread): [address-policy-wg] 2012-10 New Policy Proposal (Extension of IPv6 /32 to /29 on a per-allocation vs per-LIR basis)
Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]