[address-policy-wg] 2015-01 Draft Document and Impact Analysis Published

Hi,

Gert, sorry but I don't want to leave things unclear so I'll send this
one last reply to Lu. Please don't take into consideration any
discussions related to this issue when analyzing the 2015-01 approval.
It is off-topic but I think it shows a problem that needs to be
understood and maybe addressed.

> "Previous abuse", where is your support for such accusation?

In my opinion based on the facts that I already mention this can be
called an abuse much more than what the 2 russians have done.

> OutsideHeaven is the company name, how it legally structured should not be
> relevant anyway.

No, as anyone can read OutsideHeaven is YOUR trade name. Maybe today you
have a corporation but on that time it was you (the person) trading as
some brand.


> 
> Please provide evidence for following claim, otherwise you are just making
> accusation without any support evidence.
> 
> "He approved your request for hudreds of thousands of IPs, even approved
> this last-second allocation. "
> 
> And the reality is, Elvis has never on the position to make final decision
> about our allocation.

You told us that. I can't know what happened during that allocations. I
only was refering to what you told us, that Elvis was the one that
approved your allocations. Maybe you know what happens behind the scene
but that should also bring some questions.

> Large IPv6 deployment does not justify IPv4 need, I think this is common
> knowledge.

It was just a supporting argument. Of course the main ones were that it
was a very large ISP with huge growth, millions of customers, thousands
of employees.

> Again, you are making false statement without any evidence, in reality, I
> have never done any business with Elvis now and past.

I don't know anything about any relation that might be between you and
Elvis. You pointed him out as the one giving you the IPs (approving the
requests).

Ciprian