This archive is retained to ensure existing URLs remain functional. It will not contain any emails sent to this mailing list after July 1, 2024. For all messages, including those sent before and after this date, please visit the new location of the archive at https://mailman.ripe.net/archives/list/address-policy-wg@ripe.net/
[address-policy-wg] 2005-08 New Policy Proposal
- Previous message (by thread): [address-policy-wg] 2005-08 New Policy Proposal
- Next message (by thread): [address-policy-wg] 2005-08 New Policy Proposal
Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
Jeroen Massar
jeroen at unfix.org
Thu Oct 6 13:57:52 CEST 2005
On Thu, 2005-10-06 at 11:44 +0100, Michael.Dillon at btradianz.com wrote: > > The answer is "the RIPE policies have no answers how to do things that > > are in violation of the RIPE policies" - and assigning 10 IPv6 addresses > > > is against the policy. > > Assigning 10 IPv6 addresses is *NOT* against RIPE policy! Not in text, but as an ISP, per the policy, you say that you are going to assign /48's to endsites. If one is only going to give out single IP's then you are an endsite, thus you are only supposed to be getting a /48 in the first place. > It may come as a surprise to those of you who do not speak > English as a native language, but the word "assign" is a > synonym of the word "allocate" and both have a very general > meaning of distributing something to multiple recipients. > The fact that RIR policies use these synonyms in specific and > distinct ways does not change the fact that anyone who learns > English as a language of communication will learn that these > two words mean the same thing and can be substituted for one > another. When I allocate 10km^2 of land for a building project I still do not assign that 10km^2 of land to anybody. It's allocated, thus waiting to be assigned. Also I am quite sure that when I mention "IP" here that people will read this as "Internet Protocol", most likely not evening thinking of the long version, and not as "IPR", while lawyers read IP as "Intellectual Propery" and don't even know the term IPR which engineers know stands for "Intellectual Property Rights". All is english, still doesn't mean the same thing. Context does matter. Then again, I am not a native english speaker and I don't grab a copy of Websters for every word, but it is still how I and I guess many others, read them. It also has to do mostly with the familiarity of process. Greets, Jeroen -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: signature.asc Type: application/pgp-signature Size: 240 bytes Desc: This is a digitally signed message part URL: </ripe/mail/archives/address-policy-wg/attachments/20051006/d736a8a6/attachment.sig>
- Previous message (by thread): [address-policy-wg] 2005-08 New Policy Proposal
- Next message (by thread): [address-policy-wg] 2005-08 New Policy Proposal
Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]