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] [policy-announce] 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] [policy-announce] 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 20:29:10 CEST 2013
On Sun, Aug 11, 2013 at 03:45:22PM +0000, Milton L Mueller wrote: > But if they have to pay a price that reflects the relative scarcity of the > resource they have a much stronger incentive to conserve that the alternative > situation you describe. "Commercials" cannot simply provide all the addresses > their customers want when they cannot replenish their stock without paying a > rising price. We are talking about 1,75 € per address and per year. I guess this wouldn't stop any commercial from reselling to a client who asks for it, and certainly can pay for it, if conservation is abandonned. Best regards, Sylvain
- 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] [policy-announce] 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 ]