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] Revised 2007-01 moved back to Review Period (Direct Internet Resource Assignments to End Users from the RIPE NCC)
- Previous message (by thread): [address-policy-wg] Revised 2007-01 moved back to Review Period (Direct Internet Resource Assignments to End Users from the RIPE NCC)
- Next message (by thread): [address-policy-wg] Revised 2007-01 moved back to Review Period (Direct Internet Resource Assignments to End Users from the RIPE NCC)
Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
Leo Vegoda
leo.vegoda at icann.org
Fri Jul 11 09:56:11 CEST 2008
Shane, On 10/07/2008 11:58, "Shane Kerr" <shane at time-travellers.org> wrote: [...] > If people are unwilling to sign a contract which basically says, "I am > using this address space", then take their space back. It's not scary, > really. > > Revokation is a good thing. What would you propose the RIPE NCC do with revoked address space assignments? Should they just keep them in a "sin bin" or should they allocate or assign the address space to other network operators? Regards, Leo Vegoda
- Previous message (by thread): [address-policy-wg] Revised 2007-01 moved back to Review Period (Direct Internet Resource Assignments to End Users from the RIPE NCC)
- Next message (by thread): [address-policy-wg] Revised 2007-01 moved back to Review Period (Direct Internet Resource Assignments to End Users from the RIPE NCC)
Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]