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] 2015-01 Draft Document and Impact Analysis
- Previous message (by thread): [address-policy-wg] 2015-01 Draft Document and Impact Analysis
- Next message (by thread): [address-policy-wg] address-policy-wg Digest, Vol 46, Issue 35 Conflict of Interests
Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
Arash Naderpour
arash_mpc at parsun.com
Wed Jun 10 12:03:20 CEST 2015
Hi Erik, It may increase the cost or make it make less attractive, but I believe it would be just a temporary affect. Making less attractive is not a good argument to support it (to me) Regards, Arash Naderpour -----Original Message----- From: Erik Bais [mailto:erik at bais.name] Sent: Tuesday, June 09, 2015 11:48 AM To: Arash Naderpour; 'Gert Doering' Cc: address-policy-wg at ripe.net Subject: RE: [address-policy-wg] 2015-01 Draft Document and Impact Analysis Published Hi Arash, > "This policy proposal will not prevent organisations from setting up > one or more LIRs and hoarding the /22s. It will only add a two-year > restriction before a /22 from the last /8 can be transferred." The 24 month period will increase the cost of the 'hoarding' ... which makes it a lot less attractive to do it.. This policy change will make it a lot more expensive for the current 'abusers of the intent of the policy' to see this as a viable business model.. Regards, Erik Bais
- Previous message (by thread): [address-policy-wg] 2015-01 Draft Document and Impact Analysis
- Next message (by thread): [address-policy-wg] address-policy-wg Digest, Vol 46, Issue 35 Conflict of Interests
Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]