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] do we need a policy for avoiding "multiple unjustified LIRs"?
- Previous message (by thread): [address-policy-wg] 1st Draft Agenda for Address Policy WG at RIPE 83
- Next message (by thread): [address-policy-wg] do we need a policy for avoiding "multiple unjustified LIRs"?
Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
JORDI PALET MARTINEZ
jordi.palet at consulintel.es
Tue Nov 23 11:43:09 CET 2021
Hi all, After looking at the video from Marco, today presentation/discussion and the recent discussions on this, as I just mention, should we work in a policy proposal to amend the internal procedure so the justification for additional LIRs is stronger? I understand many cases for the need of an additional LIR, but doing valid for *any artificial case* is not good. Any though on that? Possible ideas about how we define the border line? As usual, I'm happy to work on this myself, or together with other folks. Regards, Jordi @jordipalet ********************************************** IPv4 is over Are you ready for the new Internet ? http://www.theipv6company.com The IPv6 Company This electronic message contains information which may be privileged or confidential. The information is intended to be for the exclusive use of the individual(s) named above and further non-explicilty authorized disclosure, copying, distribution or use of the contents of this information, even if partially, including attached files, is strictly prohibited and will be considered a criminal offense. If you are not the intended recipient be aware that any disclosure, copying, distribution or use of the contents of this information, even if partially, including attached files, is strictly prohibited, will be considered a criminal offense, so you must reply to the original sender to inform about this communication and delete it.
- Previous message (by thread): [address-policy-wg] 1st Draft Agenda for Address Policy WG at RIPE 83
- Next message (by thread): [address-policy-wg] do we need a policy for avoiding "multiple unjustified LIRs"?
Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]