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] layer 10+ issues with 2008-08
- Previous message (by thread): [address-policy-wg] layer 10+ issues with 2008-08
- Next message (by thread): [address-policy-wg] layer 10+ issues with 2008-08
Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
Andreas Schachtner
andreas at schachtner.eu
Mon May 9 12:50:16 CEST 2011
Hi, Am Mon, 9 May 2011 11:05:31 +0100 schrieb Jim Reid <jim at rfc1035.com>: ... > However since Sander said the lawyer says there's no way the Dutch > courts could issue such a court order, this seems to be unrealistic > unless there's new legislation. Though I wonder about the EU Go and ask the lawyers if a court can order "effective measures" to stop a certain route being announced. This can be a filtering at AMS-IX and other exchanges, blocking it at a peer level or revoking a certificate. I a worst case szenarion, interpretation is up the the LEA and the NCC the most likely target. Regards, Andreas -- Andreas Schachtner afs Holding GmbH communication technologies & solutions http://afs-com.de/ Geschaeftsfuehrer Andreas Schachtner HRB 15448, Amtsgericht Dortmund
- Previous message (by thread): [address-policy-wg] layer 10+ issues with 2008-08
- Next message (by thread): [address-policy-wg] layer 10+ issues with 2008-08
Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]