[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 ]
Jim Reid
jim at rfc1035.com
Tue May 17 20:23:49 CEST 2016
> On 17 May 2016, at 19:12, Roger Jørgensen <rogerj at gmail.com> wrote: > > What really amaze me. We are using tons of time here in ag-wg talking > over IPv4 while there is not half that activity over in IPv6-wg. Indeed. It’s like the old joke about politics in academia: the bickering and in-fighting is so acrimonious because the stakes are so low. Mind you, IPv6 address allocation policy is such a no-brainer it doesn’t need much work. Perhaps we can keep discussions on IPv4 allocation policies going until after the heat death of the universe. :-)
- 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 ]