Re: [sig-policy] prop-101-v002: Removing multihoming , requirement for I
Hash: SHA1
Izumi,
i can't answer for David, but my own thinking on this topic.
I believe that because of the apparent exhaustion of IPv4 address, we
put in a lot of policies and restrictions on utilization of IPv4
addresses. The multihoming requirement was one of those. In the early
days we didn't have that.
I support this proposal on the simple notion that artificial
restrictions put on v4 consumption shouldn't be a road block on v6
adoption/deployment. thus, I'd not care of specific example cases to
make it happen.
thanks
-gaurab
On 2/24/12 8:05 AM, Izumi Okutani wrote:
> David, perhaps you've heard about a few specific cases?
>
- --
http://www.gaurab.org.np/
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG/MacGPG2 v2.0.16 (Darwin)
Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org/
iEYEARECAAYFAk9Id5wACgkQSo7fU26F3X0W8gCdGmpzEoLvuVLqRfCWc8BJaefP
KwYAnisjk/6B9u3styiTvQ0yicBRp22l
=BTst
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----