[address-policy-wg] 2012-09 New Policy Proposal (Modification of The Time Limits For Temporary Internet Assignments)

On Sat, Dec 15, 2012 at 1:28 PM, Nick Hilliard <nick at inex.ie> wrote:

In fact, the statement is clear and unambiguous: it means one calendar
> month.  The term "month" is used widely in other RIPE docs docs, which is
> why it's used here.
>

It's as clear as our calendar is "clear", but as I stated initially, this
is a problem in general. It will not, and can not, be solved in the context
of this PDP. I merely pointed out that I would have preferred a different
wording/time frame.


Again, I support this proposal and I do _not_ want to hinder its speedy
adoption in any way. That's why I put it below the actual gist, i.e.
"support".


If anything, I would be _strongly_ in favour of easing 29c3's pain and
handing them their address space first thing Monday morning. Especially
since the support for this proposal is unanimous as of right now with 19 of
19 replies expressing support.


Richard
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: </ripe/mail/archives/address-policy-wg/attachments/20121215/37b71f02/attachment.html>