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] late conciliatory response to 2014-03
- Previous message (by thread): [address-policy-wg] late conciliatory response to 2014-03
- Next message (by thread): [address-policy-wg] late conciliatory response to 2014-03
Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
Sascha Luck [ml]
apwg at c4inet.net
Tue Jan 20 01:07:55 CET 2015
On Mon, Jan 19, 2015 at 01:42:49PM -0800, Sander Steffann wrote: >As a working group we need to decide a few things: >- do we want to make it easy to get ASNs? (the answer seems to be "yes") Yes, please. >- do we want to place a limit? Probably a good idea. >- do we want a time-based or absolute limit? A time-based limit has merit, actually. It avoids the "magic number" issue and will certainly prevent a "smash-and-grab" scenario. >- do we wait for the next RIPE NCC charging scheme to see if >that solves our problems? I'm not in favour of this. What I want to see is that the membership fee covers all my dealings with the NCC. In small companies, you often have to get budgetary approval for even EUR50, and I'm in *no* mood to explain to a bean-counter (or the boss's wife) what an ASN is and why I need 50 quid to pay for another one. rgds, Sascha Luck >Cheers, Sander Steffann APWG co-chair > >
- Previous message (by thread): [address-policy-wg] late conciliatory response to 2014-03
- Next message (by thread): [address-policy-wg] late conciliatory response to 2014-03
Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]