A description of the problem the change is intended to address would also be helpful to provide better context.
Thanks, Scott From: [email protected] [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of Hadenfeldt, Andrew C Sent: Tuesday, October 20, 2015 10:06 AM To: Martin Hannigan; [email protected] Subject: Re: [arin-ppml] Transition /10 I’m missing some context… RFC6598 (100.64.0.0/10)? -Andy From: [email protected]<mailto:[email protected]> [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of Martin Hannigan Sent: Tuesday, October 20, 2015 9:57 AM To: [email protected]<mailto:[email protected]> Subject: [arin-ppml] Transition /10 Any reason why at this point we shouldn't transition the transition /10 to a last /N like policy to more align with others? It does seem to be reasonable and fair. It seems like it was a mistake to not set aside the /8. Thoughts? Best, -M< ________________________________ This email message and any attachments are for the sole use of the intended recipient(s). Any unauthorized review, use, disclosure or distribution is prohibited. If you are not the intended recipient, please contact the sender by reply email and destroy all copies of the original message and any attachments.
_______________________________________________ PPML You are receiving this message because you are subscribed to the ARIN Public Policy Mailing List ([email protected]). Unsubscribe or manage your mailing list subscription at: http://lists.arin.net/mailman/listinfo/arin-ppml Please contact [email protected] if you experience any issues.
