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] 2013-03 New Draft Document and Impact Analysis Published (No Need - Post-Depletion Reality Adjustment and Clean up)
- Previous message (by thread): [address-policy-wg] [policy-announce] 2013-03 New Draft Document and Impact Analysis Published (No Need - Post-Depletion Reality Adjustment and Clean up)
- Next message (by thread): [address-policy-wg] 2013-03 New Draft Document and Impact Analysis Published (No Need - Post-Depletion Reality Adjustment and Clean up)
Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
Sylvain Vallerot
sylvain.vallerot at opdop.net
Sun Aug 11 14:11:09 CEST 2013
On 04/08/2013 16:48, Tore Anderson wrote: > In a similar vein, and somewhat tongue in cheek: If you're trying to buy > an apartment, but get outbid by someone, do you get upset unless you can > see some proof that guy did buy it plans on moving in there? Or do you > assume that's probably the case and move on? We got something in France that is called the right to housing. The question is not, of course, but is not fully disconnected of knowing if does Ripe wants to tend to protect the public right of weaks to get a place. You asked repetedly here for precise statements to explain how 2013-03 would, on its own, make things worse. And you explained many times that wrong things could already be done independantly from 2013-03 being accepted or not. Things cannot be split that way in my mind. My point is, that 2013-03 is part of a much larger evolution that is progressively making the deal completely different. I cannot help but consider thinks together and observe a general move that breaches yesterday's principles : - the ability to resell IPv4 allocations - the proposal to allow v4 PI changed to PA (aggregation breach) - the suppression of the conservation goal - the documentation need removal To me, the general picture looks like is that considerable ground is given to a fully commercial hand over the public ressource management. This seems to be motivated by kind of a hurry to get rid of the burden of the IPv4 administrative work. Which I feel hard to understand since lots of operators still need a proper and fair ressource attribution to continue or to start their business today (which is being more critical because of scarcity) and also because Ripe members still pay membership fees to finance it. Sorry I went quite far from simple 2013-03 discussion here. However reducing the discussion field does not allow to build a global policy that is consistent and has a coherent philosophy, I think. Best regards, Sylvain > > Tore > -- http://www.opdop.fr - mutualiser et interconnecter en coopérative -- ManyOnes.COM SARL - RCS Paris B 449 031 574 - TVA n°FR56449031574 en cours de mutation comme Société Coopérative d'Interêt Collectif -- ManyOnes, c/o Sylvain Vallerot, 3 rue Erckmann Chatrian, 75018 Paris
- Previous message (by thread): [address-policy-wg] [policy-announce] 2013-03 New Draft Document and Impact Analysis Published (No Need - Post-Depletion Reality Adjustment and Clean up)
- Next message (by thread): [address-policy-wg] 2013-03 New Draft Document and Impact Analysis Published (No Need - Post-Depletion Reality Adjustment and Clean up)
Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]