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] 2015-01 Draft Document and Impact Analysis Published (Alignment of Transfer Requirements for IPv4 Allocations)
- Previous message (by thread): [address-policy-wg] 2015-01 Draft Document and Impact Analysis Published (Alignment of Transfer Requirements for IPv4 Allocations)
- Next message (by thread): [address-policy-wg] 2015-01 Draft Document and Impact Analysis Published (Alignment of Transfer Requirements for IPv4 Allocations)
Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
Sander Steffann
sander at steffann.nl
Wed May 13 09:49:51 CEST 2015
Hi Sasha, > A LIR now joining the RIPE NCC has no way of determining what the > "spirit" of a policy is. (bar, perhaps, reading all apwg > discussions leading to it) The letter of the document is all that > counts and IPRAs can't make determinations based on the "spirit" > either, otherwise this proposal would not be necessary. > So, yes, an assumption that one can join the NCC now and get a > /22 with the intent to "sell" it is reasonable. The policy actually says that "The LIR must confirm it will make assignment(s) from the allocation". See https://www.ripe.net/publications/docs/ripe-643#51. This is not the case if the intent is to sell the prefix. Cheers, Sander
- Previous message (by thread): [address-policy-wg] 2015-01 Draft Document and Impact Analysis Published (Alignment of Transfer Requirements for IPv4 Allocations)
- Next message (by thread): [address-policy-wg] 2015-01 Draft Document and Impact Analysis Published (Alignment of Transfer Requirements for IPv4 Allocations)
Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]