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] 2007-01 Last Call for Comments (Direct Internet Resource Assignments to End Users from the RIPE NCC)
- Previous message (by thread): [address-policy-wg] 2007-01 Last Call for Comments (Direct Internet Resource Assignments to End Users from the RIPE NCC)
- Next message (by thread): [address-policy-wg] 2007-01 Last Call for Comments (Direct Internet Resource Assignments to End Users from the RIPE NCC)
Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
Frederic
frederic at placenet.org
Tue Apr 8 11:58:54 CEST 2008
Le mardi 08 avril 2008 à 11:38 +0200, Shane Kerr a écrit : > Max, > > I'm going to repeat stuff you already know. Sorry! > > Regarding the source of the traffic, right now in IPv4 we have the > situation where we have: > > IANA -> RIPE NCC -> LIR -> PI recipient > > Once the link between the RIPE NCC and the LIR, or between the LIR and > PI recipient is broken, the space is completely untraceable. why is broken ? because Ripe do not implement relation between PI holder thru Database information. Dead PI is like Dead Domain name. a simple procedure thru mail communication can force to have news about "may be Dead" block and take the good decision. To force "Contractual Link with Ripe" for PI bloc is not the good way. To force Fees is not good too. bst regards. Frederic
- Previous message (by thread): [address-policy-wg] 2007-01 Last Call for Comments (Direct Internet Resource Assignments to End Users from the RIPE NCC)
- Next message (by thread): [address-policy-wg] 2007-01 Last Call for Comments (Direct Internet Resource Assignments to End Users from the RIPE NCC)
Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]