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] Legal counsel on 2008-08 (Initial Certification Policy in the RIPE NCC Service Region)
- Previous message (by thread): [address-policy-wg] Legal counsel on 2008-08 (Initial Certification Policy in the RIPE NCC Service Region)
- Next message (by thread): [address-policy-wg] pointer to ietf sidr wg
Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
Sascha Luck
lists-ripe at c4inet.net
Mon May 9 21:55:59 CEST 2011
On Mon, May 09, 2011 at 09:34:21PM +0200, Sander Steffann wrote: >You miss the next sentence of the legal advise: >"In the absence of such legislation, a court cannot order > the revocation of certificates." > >I think the legal statement (when read as a whole, not cherry- >picking the parts you like) was clear enough. Hmmm, do you have much experience with lawyer-speak? This means that a court cannot order the revocation of a ROA cert *specifically* as there is no legislation covering that. What it *can* do, is order the NCC to do everything possible to stop this prefix from being announced. o I know nothing about Dutch law but I would be highly surprised if that wasn't possible in .nl. rgds, Sascha
- Previous message (by thread): [address-policy-wg] Legal counsel on 2008-08 (Initial Certification Policy in the RIPE NCC Service Region)
- Next message (by thread): [address-policy-wg] pointer to ietf sidr wg
Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]