[address-policy-wg] AW: [ipv6-wg] DRAFT: RIPE Community Resolution on IPv4 Depletion and Deployment of IPv6
- Previous message (by thread): [address-policy-wg] AW: [ipv6-wg] DRAFT: RIPE Community Resolution on IPv4 Depletion and Deployment of IPv6
- Next message (by thread): [address-policy-wg] AW: [ipv6-wg] DRAFT: RIPE Community Resolution on IPv4 Depletion and Deployment of IPv6
Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
Florian Weimer
fw at deneb.enyo.de
Sun Oct 21 22:29:21 CEST 2007
* Gert Doering: > Hi, > > On Fri, Oct 19, 2007 at 08:14:18PM +0200, Sascha Lenz wrote: >> b) there aren't that many change-requeensts (nono, no ITIL...) for the >> wording, are they? Did i miss something in the mess? > > As far as I can see, so far, the main point was: > > - address the vendors Or only address RIPE members, which would make more sense IMHO.
- Previous message (by thread): [address-policy-wg] AW: [ipv6-wg] DRAFT: RIPE Community Resolution on IPv4 Depletion and Deployment of IPv6
- Next message (by thread): [address-policy-wg] AW: [ipv6-wg] DRAFT: RIPE Community Resolution on IPv4 Depletion and Deployment of IPv6
Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
[ ipv6-wg Archives ]