> Geoff Huston wrote:
> Does that mean want to propose to use 2001:D0C0::/32 as well?

Gee, even I could remember that one! 2001:D0C::/32 would be even nicer,
there are number of other alternatives such as 2001:2D0C::/32 and
2001:4D0C::/32.

Michel.


--------------------------------------------------------------------
IETF IPng Working Group Mailing List
IPng Home Page:                      http://playground.sun.com/ipng
FTP archive:                      ftp://playground.sun.com/pub/ipng
Direct all administrative requests to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
--------------------------------------------------------------------

Reply via email to