Re: [sig-policy] prop-087: IPv6 address allocation fordeployment purpose
open this door, what about other standards organizations? ITU-T, IEEE and
others?
Our focus is IP address resource. Other organizations have their own focus and
criteria for their standards. To tie IP addressing policy to implementation RFC
is a bad idea, IMHO.
yi
----- Original Message ----
From: Randy Bush <randy at psg dot com>
To: Terence Zhang YH <zhangyinghao at cnnic dot cn>
Cc: pfs at cisco dot com; Tomohiro at clove dot apnic dot net; sig-policy at lists dot apnic dot net; "藤崎
智宏"" <fujisaki at syce dot net>
Sent: Mon, August 16, 2010 10:38:35 PM
Subject: Re: [sig-policy] prop-087: IPv6 address allocation fordeployment
purposes
if we do not understand the tecnology, perhaps it is a bit premature to
make policy to accommodate it?
randy
* sig-policy: APNIC SIG on resource management policy *
_______________________________________________
sig-policy mailing list
sig-policy at lists dot apnic dot net
http://mailman.apnic.net/mailman/listinfo/sig-policy