8 Sep
2010
8 Sep
'10
3:49 p.m.
Thus wrote Denis Walker (denis@ripe.net):
Marco Hogewoning wrote:
On Sep 6, 2010, at 4:06 PM, <kpn-ip-office@kpn.com> <kpn-ip-office@kpn.com> wrote:
I have some questions about the proposal Question 1: Why was chosen for "SUB-ASSIGNED PA" and not for "SUB-ALLOCATED PA" or even "LIR-PARTITIONED PA", [...]
[...]
One is to aggregate many individual customers into an assignment block.
It's a rather bikeshedding issue, but maybe pick AGGREGATED PA? LIR-PARTITIONED PA would also be easily understandable, but is a mouthful. :) regards, spz