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] 62.222.0.0/15
- Previous message (by thread): [address-policy-wg] 62.222.0.0/15
- Next message (by thread): [address-policy-wg] 62.222.0.0/15
Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
Radu-Adrian FEURDEAN
ripe-wgs at radu-adrian.feurdean.net
Wed Oct 9 08:50:38 CEST 2019
On Wed, Oct 9, 2019, at 07:37, Ronald F. Guilmette wrote: > I guess that I will have to speak to my friends in the DB working group > about that, because there is *no* indication of this whatsoever in > either the current -or- the historical records for the 62.222.0.0/15 > block, specifically. Probably a less specific.... When a less specific is splitted for transfer, the transferred chunk (didn't check for the remaining ones, but I suppose it's the same), has the "created date" of the transfer, but the date in the netname retains the date of the initial allocation. -- Radu-Adrian FEURDEAN
- Previous message (by thread): [address-policy-wg] 62.222.0.0/15
- Next message (by thread): [address-policy-wg] 62.222.0.0/15
Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]