Quoting RFC2860 [Re: I-D Action:draft-azinger-scalable-addressing-00.txt]

[Gert Doering]

Hi,

On Mon, Sep 27, 2010 at 12:15:06AM -0700, Tony Li wrote:
> > That was a specific exemption without which I don't believe ICANN
> > would ever have signed the MoU.
> 
> Agreed.  Once again, we are trying to agree on an addressing 
> architecture, not policy.

The statement "*you* get your own globally visible chunk of address space,
and *you* don't" sounds very much like what we have in our policy documents.

So maybe something could explain to the non-native speakers on this
list what the distinction between "addressing architecture" and 
"address policy" is.

curious,

Gert Doering
        -- RIPE Address Policy Wrangler
-- 
did you enable IPv6 on something today...?

SpaceNet AG                        Vorstand: Sebastian v. Bomhard
Joseph-Dollinger-Bogen 14          Aufsichtsratsvors.: A. Grundner-Culemann
D-80807 Muenchen                   HRB: 136055 (AG Muenchen)
Tel: +49 (89) 32356-444            USt-IdNr.: DE813185279
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 306 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <https://lists.cluenet.de/pipermail/ipv6-ops/attachments/20100927/e210d27b/attachment.sig>