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 ]
Dan Luedtke
maildanrl at gmail.com
Sun Dec 16 13:11:04 CET 2012
On Sat, Dec 15, 2012 at 1:13 PM, Gert Doering <gert at space.net> wrote: >> Can't we just say n days instead of month? >> With n being 30* days? > > So, do you want to see this policy implemented quickly, or do you want to > paint a bikeshed instead? I would be more than happy if there is any way to speed up the PDP on this proposal. I just had to admin that I see Richard's point. This wasn't meant to be against the proposal, which, as stated earlier, I still support. Regards Dan -- Dan Luedtke http://www.danrl.de
- 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 ]