Re: [sig-policy] Call for policy proposals for APNIC 32

To: Andy Linton <asjl at lpnz dot org>
Subject: Re: [sig-policy] Call for policy proposals for APNIC 32
From: Randy Bush <randy at psg dot com>
Date: Mon, 30 May 2011 09:11:44 +0300
Cc: APNIC Policy SIG List <sig-policy at apnic dot net>
Delivered-to: sig-policy at mailman dot apnic dot net
In-reply-to: <4DE2B9F3.6040808 at lpnz dot org>
List-archive: <http://mailman.apnic.net/mailing-lists/sig-policy>
List-help: <mailto:sig-policy-request@lists.apnic.net?subject=help>
List-id: APNIC SIG on resource management policy <sig-policy.lists.apnic.net>
List-post: <mailto:sig-policy@lists.apnic.net>
List-subscribe: <http://mailman.apnic.net/mailman/listinfo/sig-policy>, <mailto:sig-policy-request@lists.apnic.net?subject=subscribe>
List-unsubscribe: <http://mailman.apnic.net/mailman/listinfo/sig-policy>, <mailto:sig-policy-request@lists.apnic.net?subject=unsubscribe>
References: <4DE2B9F3.6040808@lpnz.org>
User-agent: Wanderlust/2.15.9 (Almost Unreal) Emacs/22.3 Mule/5.0 (SAKAKI)

> distributing IPv4 addresses according to the final /8 policies.

was that really the case?  looking at geoff's numbers, it appears as if the 
trigger may be been pulled a little early.  could the secretariat comment?

randy