This archive is retained to ensure existing URLs remain functional. It will not contain any emails sent to this mailing list after July 1, 2024. For all messages, including those sent before and after this date, please visit the new location of the archive at https://mailman.ripe.net/archives/list/[email protected]/
[address-policy-wg] Temporary Internet Assignments policy
- Previous message (by thread): [address-policy-wg] Temporary Internet Assignments policy
- Next message (by thread): [address-policy-wg] Temporary Internet Assignments policy
Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
niels=apwg at bakker.net
niels=apwg at bakker.net
Tue Sep 18 00:18:38 CEST 2012
* marcin at leon.pl (Marcin Kuczera) [Tue 18 Sep 2012, 00:05 CEST]: >On 2012-09-17 18:59, Martin Millnert wrote: >>[Devils advocate] Why must there be special treatment for >>conference-space (temporary assignments) at all? >>Why can't conferences run NAT-something+IPv6 like the rest of >>everything? Since networky-conferences are the most common >>requesters of these temp-blocks in the first place by my >>understanding, wouldn't that be an excellent place to start >>adapting to the future rather than getting special treatment and >>sticking to the old? >> >>Couldn't this help with dissipating clue to real networks, etc? >> >>Just a thought. > >Clear point of view, I like it ! I don't think the point of the policy is to punish people for having addressing needs. -- Niels.
- Previous message (by thread): [address-policy-wg] Temporary Internet Assignments policy
- Next message (by thread): [address-policy-wg] Temporary Internet Assignments policy
Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]