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] Update on ALLOCATED PI/UNSPECIFIED
- Previous message (by thread): [address-policy-wg] Update on ALLOCATED PI/UNSPECIFIED
- Next message (by thread): [address-policy-wg] Update on ALLOCATED PI/UNSPECIFIED
Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
Sergey Myasoedov
sergey at devnull.ru
Thu Aug 4 16:29:59 CEST 2016
Hi Gert, > We (the RIPE community and the NCC) rolled out 2007-01 to all the > other PI holders, and the amount of unhappiness was not very big. No. It was big. But you prefer not to mention that. That’s your perception, please don’t say ‘we’. > Those cases that I was involved with my "LIR admin-c" hat on, PI holders > seemed to be happy to have a clear contract with a known entity (us), and > the assurance that this would ensure that nobody else could make claims > to their address space. By the way, 2007-01 has produced a new market with ~2 MEUR/yr volume. Do you really think that PI holders were happy to pay such amount? -- Kind regards, Sergey Myasoedov
- Previous message (by thread): [address-policy-wg] Update on ALLOCATED PI/UNSPECIFIED
- Next message (by thread): [address-policy-wg] Update on ALLOCATED PI/UNSPECIFIED
Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]