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] A failure to communicate
- Previous message (by thread): [address-policy-wg] A failure to communicate
- Next message (by thread): [address-policy-wg] A failure to communicate
Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
Jim Reid
jim at rfc1035.com
Wed Jul 1 12:09:22 CEST 2015
On 1 Jul 2015, at 10:39, Vladimir Andreev <vladimir at quick-soft.net> wrote: > So do we have real consensus? For this policy proposal, I think we do. Though it's not down to me to make that decision. Jan Ingvoldstat has just explained where you are going wrong and what to do about that. Short version: you're in a hole, so stop digging. Unless you have NEW concerns about 2015-01 that have not been previously raised, I think you should stop adding noise. More noise is unhelpful and annoying and just a total waste of everyone's time. The PDP is open to you if you wish to propose a policy which addresses your concerns and/or cancels 2015-01.
- Previous message (by thread): [address-policy-wg] A failure to communicate
- Next message (by thread): [address-policy-wg] A failure to communicate
Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]