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] 2012-09 New Policy Proposal (Modification of The Time Limits For Temporary Internet Assignments)
- Previous message (by thread): [address-policy-wg] 2012-09 New Policy Proposal (Modification of The Time Limits For Temporary Internet Assignments)
- Next message (by thread): [address-policy-wg] 2012-09 New Policy Proposal (Modification of The Time Limits For Temporary Internet Assignments)
Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
Nick Hilliard
nick at inex.ie
Fri Dec 14 23:39:54 CET 2012
On 14/12/2012 21:38, Dan Luedtke wrote: > I strongly support this proposal! > We had this problem more than once, and this is a good solution. > >> 1) A month can be anything between 28 and 31 days so I would have >> preferred a clearer statement. But this a problem in general and I am >> certain RIPE will follow this in a pragmatic way. > +1 clearer statement Thanks for the comment (and for supporting the proposal). From what I understand, the RIPE NCC has a procedure of defining a "month" calendar months unless otherwise specified. Nick
- Previous message (by thread): [address-policy-wg] 2012-09 New Policy Proposal (Modification of The Time Limits For Temporary Internet Assignments)
- Next message (by thread): [address-policy-wg] 2012-09 New Policy Proposal (Modification of The Time Limits For Temporary Internet Assignments)
Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]