[ppml] question on 2006-2 v6 internal microallocation

Stacy Taylor ipgoddess at gmail.com
Wed Aug 23 20:12:32 EDT 2006

I likewise think that language should not be in the policy.  ARIN AC
is as we speak in the process of looking at the NRPM with the possible
intention to take out any operational recommendations.
Let's not put in what we'll likely wind up taking out down the road.

On 8/23/06, bmanning at vacation.karoshi.com <bmanning at vacation.karoshi.com> wrote:
> On Wed, Aug 23, 2006 at 12:43:00PM -0400, Jason Schiller wrote:
> (quoting unnamed sources)
> >
> > This micro-allocation MUST not be routed.  If an organization is found to
> > be routing their micro-allocation for internal infrastructure they must
> > either correct this mistake or surrender thier micro-allocation for
> > internal infrastructure.
> >
>         humph... routed -where-?
>         prefixes not routed are effective only in the single broadcast domain
>         where they are used.  me thinks this "requirement" is overly broad
>         and screams for the creation of the "routing police".  e.g.
>         Geoff and the RIB/FIBettes. eh?
>         i'm in favor of -NOT- having this language.
> --bill
> _______________________________________________
> PPML mailing list
> PPML at arin.net
> http://lists.arin.net/mailman/listinfo/ppml


More information about the ARIN-PPML mailing list