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] 2012-02 New Draft Document and Impact Analysis Published (Policy for Inter-RIR Transfers of IPv4 Address Space)
- Previous message (by thread): [address-policy-wg] 2012-02 New Draft Document and Impact Analysis Published (Policy for Inter-RIR Transfers of IPv4 Address Space)
- Next message (by thread): [address-policy-wg] 2012-02 New Draft Document and Impact Analysis Published (Policy for Inter-RIR Transfers of IPv4 Address Space)
Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
boggits
boggits at gmail.com
Mon Mar 11 15:00:46 CET 2013
On 4 March 2013 13:46, Emilio Madaio <emadaio at ripe.net> wrote: > The draft document for the version 2.0 of the proposal 2012-02, > "Policy for Inter-RIR Transfers of IPv4 Address Space", has been > published. The impact analysis that was conducted for this proposal > has also been published. Just re-read this and thought that: "Such address space must not contain any block that is assigned to an End User" might cause a problem for those want to transfer space with the end user intact or even in some cases maybe just the end user. I know its out of scope, but was there logic behind this? J -- James Blessing 07989 039 476
- Previous message (by thread): [address-policy-wg] 2012-02 New Draft Document and Impact Analysis Published (Policy for Inter-RIR Transfers of IPv4 Address Space)
- Next message (by thread): [address-policy-wg] 2012-02 New Draft Document and Impact Analysis Published (Policy for Inter-RIR Transfers of IPv4 Address Space)
Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]