[address-policy-wg] 2016-03 New Policy Proposal (Locking Down the Final /8 Policy)
- Previous message (by thread): [address-policy-wg] 2016-03 New Policy Proposal (Locking Down the Final /8 Policy)
- Next message (by thread): [address-policy-wg] 2016-03 New Policy Proposal (Locking Down the Final /8 Policy)
Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
Aled Morris
aled.w.morris at googlemail.com
Fri Jun 10 17:19:15 CEST 2016
On Friday, 10 June 2016, Dominik Nowacki <dominik at clouvider.co.uk> wrote: > Aled, > The data you provided is not relevant. > > For example, we have a significant number of Customers who have a number > of servers with us, are LIRs themselves, but we do BGP for them, as such > there is a significant number of /22s originated from our AS, yet not > owned, nor operated by us. > I'm curious to know what benefit such customers perceive from being LIRs (rather than just taking IP address space from you). From what you say they don't run their own networks - do they assign resources to their downstream customers? Not from the 185/8 allocation obviously. Aled -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: <https://lists.ripe.net/ripe/mail/archives/address-policy-wg/attachments/20160610/2afdcb56/attachment.html>
- Previous message (by thread): [address-policy-wg] 2016-03 New Policy Proposal (Locking Down the Final /8 Policy)
- Next message (by thread): [address-policy-wg] 2016-03 New Policy Proposal (Locking Down the Final /8 Policy)
Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]