Re: [apnic-talk] Status field for inet6num objects

To: Anne Lord <anne@apnic.net>, Joao Luis Silva Damas <joao@ripe.net>
Subject: Re: [apnic-talk] Status field for inet6num objects
From: Geoff Huston <gih@telstra.net>
Date: Wed, 12 Jun 2002 14:00:50 +1000
Cc: ipv6-wg@ripe.net, lir-wg@ripe.net, db-wg@ripe.net, sig-db@lists.apnic.net, sig-policy@lists.apnic.net, apnic-talk@lists.apnic.net
In-reply-to: <Pine.UW2.4.10.10206120934070.15496-100000@hadrian.apnic.net>
References: <p05111701b91cde949994@[193.0.1.81]>
Sender: owner-apnic-talk@lists.apnic.net


>To clarify, the values that APNIC would prefer to use are:
>
>ALLOCATED PORTABLE
>ALLOCATED NON-PORTABLE
>ASSIGNED PORTABLE
>ASSIGNED NON-PORTABLE
>
>As I mentioned before, these values would be consistent with those in
>IPv4 (which take effect in August when the migration to version 3 of the
>RIPE database is complete).
>
>Comments?

I would be in favour of this clarity in the field regarding PORTABLE and 
NON_PORTABLE.
However, the distinction between "ALLOCATED" and "ASSIGNED" is perhaps a 
bit subtle.

regards,

   Geoff



*              APNIC-TALK: General APNIC Discussion List             *
* To unsubscribe: send "unsubscribe" to apnic-talk-request@apnic.net *

References:
- Re: [apnic-talk] Status field for inet6num objects
  - From: Anne Lord <anne@apnic.net>

Prev by Date: Re: [apnic-talk] Status field for inet6num objects
Next by Date: [apnic-talk] End Main Border
Previous by thread: Re: [apnic-talk] Status field for inet6num objects
Next by thread: Re: [apnic-talk] Status field for inet6num objects
Index(es):
- Date
- Thread