Hi Thomas,
I've read yesterday this document, and I'm basically ok with it, but with
two considerations that I think must be worked out it parallel somehow:
1) HD-Ratio modification, as it seems to be an integral part of the
discussion.
2) I've the feeling that if we suggest the ISPs to move to a
On Wed, 13 Jul 2005, Thomas Narten wrote:
Here's an ID for consideration by the IPv6 WG.
IMHO, v6ops WG would be more appropriate for this kind of work.
Background:
Discussion on the more general topic took place at the April ARIN and
May RIPE meetings. A good summary of those
Hi Jordi.
I've read yesterday this document, and I'm basically ok with it, but with
two considerations that I think must be worked out it parallel somehow:
1) HD-Ratio modification, as it seems to be an integral part of the
discussion.
IMO, changing the HD-ratio is a no-brainer, and I
Hi Thomas,
I totally agree with your appreciations.
May be one possibility to ensure that this is going to work also with the
RIRs is to hold this document until the RIRs policy changes align to it, and
work pro-actively with them in order to make that happening ASAP ?
I will suggest a small
Thomas and Jordi,
I of course share the worry that the operators will start charging
differently different size end-user allocations. However, I feel there
is little we can do about the in the IETF and therefore I would see that
we should not use too much time on this.
I think the only practical
Hi,
On Jul 14, 2005, at 2:59 AM, Soininen Jonne (Nokia-NET/Helsinki) wrote:
I of course share the worry that the operators will start charging
differently different size end-user allocations.
I strongly suspect they will since many ISPs have already
incorporated address space charges into
Hi Thomas,
Thank you for extending this discussion to the global ML
from IETF arena.
I have been observing the current discussion on reviewing
the current policies and address allocation practices.
Then, I felt that we should resort what a real issue is.
Why do we need to change HD-Ratio?
Why
A New Internet-Draft is available from the on-line Internet-Drafts directories.
This draft is a work item of the IP Version 6 Working Group Working Group of
the IETF.
Title : IPv6 Node Information Queries
Author(s) : M. Crawford, B. Haberman
Filename
A New Internet-Draft is available from the on-line Internet-Drafts directories.
This draft is a work item of the IP Version 6 Working Group Working Group of
the IETF.
Title : Internet Control Message Protocol (ICMPv6) for
the Internet Protocol Version
...I didn't understand the proposal
assumed additional requirements for URL/URI parsers, so I didn't
understand its usefulness. **If we can allow that**, I see this can
be useful, while it should be minor usage ...
Certainly, it's envisioned to be a small niche, which is why I am
not ready to
| Regarding the assignment size, when we held JP Open Policy
| Meeting last week, there are many voices saying that
| varying assignment size is too much impact on the current
| commercial service not in its network operation but also
| for the low-cost routing devices handling /48.
|
11 matches
Mail list logo
