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] 2012-05 New Draft Document and Impact Analysis Published (Transparency in Address Block Transfers)
- Previous message (by thread): [address-policy-wg] 2012-05 New Draft Document and Impact Analysis Published (Transparency in Address Block Transfers)
- Next message (by thread): [address-policy-wg] 2012-05 New Draft Document and Impact Analysis Published (Transparency in Address Block Transfers)
Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
Sascha Luck
lists-ripe at c4inet.net
Mon Sep 3 12:38:37 CEST 2012
On Mon, Sep 03, 2012 at 12:28:59PM +0200, Sander Steffann wrote: >So... Again your feedback please! Is there anyone who thinks that >anonymising details of rejected transfers is a bad idea? (and if so: >please explain why) I'd go one further and anonymise all transfer data. Who has an operational *need-to-know* this data? rgds, Sascha Luck
- Previous message (by thread): [address-policy-wg] 2012-05 New Draft Document and Impact Analysis Published (Transparency in Address Block Transfers)
- Next message (by thread): [address-policy-wg] 2012-05 New Draft Document and Impact Analysis Published (Transparency in Address Block Transfers)
Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]