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] Re: [anti-spam-wg] Fwd: Re: Re: NCC#2007083003 Fwd: DELIVERY FAILURE:
- Previous message (by thread): [address-policy-wg] Re: [anti-spam-wg] Fwd: Re: Re: NCC#2007083003 Fwd: DELIVERY FAILURE:
- Next message (by thread): [address-policy-wg] Re: [anti-spam-wg] Fwd: Re: Re: NCC#2007083003 Fwd: DELIVERY FAILURE:
Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
Leo Vegoda
leo.vegoda at icann.org
Fri Aug 31 12:57:34 CEST 2007
On 27 Aug 2007, at 16:40, der Mouse wrote: [...] >> Please let me know where I can get a copy of the document authorising >> IANA to regulate in this area. > > Why do you need one? IANA has the authority to delegate address space > (again, restricting the discussion to just address space for ease of > language); where does it get that from? What compels it to so > delegate > without an AUP attached? The authority is given by the RIR communities who develop the policy. The policy they drafted and agreed did not include an AUP section. I have a feeling that it might not include an AUP because it no-one wanted one. I could be wrong, though. You can propose a change to that policy through the same system. If you want to change the whole system then Randy is right and you need to take things up elsewhere, like at the IGF. Regards, Leo Vegoda
- Previous message (by thread): [address-policy-wg] Re: [anti-spam-wg] Fwd: Re: Re: NCC#2007083003 Fwd: DELIVERY FAILURE:
- Next message (by thread): [address-policy-wg] Re: [anti-spam-wg] Fwd: Re: Re: NCC#2007083003 Fwd: DELIVERY FAILURE:
Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]