Re: IPv6 Allocation Policy
Pekka Savola <[email protected]>
| Newsgroups | gmane.org.apnic.global-v6 |
|---|---|
| Message-ID | <[email protected]> |
On Fri, 23 May 2003, Brian E Carpenter wrote: > I think we're drifting away from the question of what the policy should > say. Indeed, but we're trying to understand the reasons why policy should be written the way it is. > The point, I think, was to ease the wording to allow for > giving /32s in any case where common sense would allow it. Which may not actually help that much .. unless it's typically allowed to use the routing system for traffic engineering etc. purposes. ... which might take us back to the swamp we have today ... It doesn't come as a surprise to me that precise Internet-wide traffic engineering is one of the biggest practical problems here when discussing extending the /32 to some end-sites.. -- Pekka Savola "You each name yourselves king, yet the Netcore Oy kingdom bleeds." Systems. Networks. Security. -- George R.R. Martin: A Clash of Kings _______________________________________________ global-v6 mailing list [email protected] http://mailman.apnic.net/mailman/listinfo/global-v6