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/[email protected]/
[address-policy-wg] 2006-05 New Policy Proposal (PI Assignment Size)
- Previous message (by thread): [address-policy-wg] 2006-05 New Policy Proposal (PI Assignment Size)
- Next message (by thread): [address-policy-wg] 2006-05 New Policy Proposal (PI Assignment Size)
Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
Max Tulyev
president at ukraine.su
Thu Sep 21 19:27:06 CEST 2006
Andy Davidson wrote: > You're opening up a huge can of worms here. > 'Getting back IPs' means > contacting peers and upstreams and telling these parties to stop > accepting the announcement from the non-paying company. If the company > is still paying bills to their upstreams, do you think upstreams will > take kindly to this action ? > The RIPE NCC deleting the inetnum object doesn't mean the addresses stop > routing ... It means. Just because of this space will not be routed in the world. RR DB is a good thing! ;) -- WBR, Max Tulyev (MT6561-RIPE, 2:463/253 at FIDO)
- Previous message (by thread): [address-policy-wg] 2006-05 New Policy Proposal (PI Assignment Size)
- Next message (by thread): [address-policy-wg] 2006-05 New Policy Proposal (PI Assignment Size)
Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]