[address-policy-wg] 2015-05 New Policy Proposal (Revision of Last /8 Allocation Criteria)
- Previous message (by thread): [address-policy-wg] 2015-05 New Policy Proposal (Revision of Last /8 Allocation Criteria)
- Next message (by thread): [address-policy-wg] 2015-05 New Policy Proposal (Revision of Last /8 Allocation Criteria)
Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
Sascha Luck [ml]
apwg at c4inet.net
Wed Oct 21 00:38:50 CEST 2015
On Tue, Oct 20, 2015 at 10:44:00PM +0100, Jim Reid wrote: >Besides, there's no RIR policy correct >-- or reason to have one -- Isn't "provide an incentive to actually start deploying ipv6 services" a good enough reason? It is in my book. It certainly provides a much better reward than having 4 or 5 stars on the RIPEness page. >which doles out extra v4 allocations to LIRs who deploy v6. >If there's a compelling case to justify overturning current >policy, it's not being made in 2015-05. I'm sure everyone here >will be delighted to consider that case when someone presents a >convincing argument which shows why the current policy is >defective for the RIPE community as a whole. Over to you... Please do not presume to speak for me or "everyone else" for that matter. Kind Regards, Sascha Luck
- Previous message (by thread): [address-policy-wg] 2015-05 New Policy Proposal (Revision of Last /8 Allocation Criteria)
- Next message (by thread): [address-policy-wg] 2015-05 New Policy Proposal (Revision of Last /8 Allocation Criteria)
Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]