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] do we need a policy for avoiding "multiple unjustified LIRs"?
- Previous message (by thread): [address-policy-wg] do we need a policy for avoiding "multiple unjustified LIRs"?
- Next message (by thread): [address-policy-wg] do we need a policy for avoiding "multiple unjustified LIRs"?
Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
Gert Doering
gert at space.net
Tue Nov 23 11:46:36 CET 2021
Hi,
On Tue, Nov 23, 2021 at 11:43:09AM +0100, JORDI PALET MARTINEZ via address-policy-wg wrote:
> 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?
There is no "justification for additional LIR" policy, as that's a
contractual matter...
Gert Doering
-- NetMaster
--
have you enabled IPv6 on something today...?
SpaceNet AG Vorstand: Sebastian v. Bomhard, Michael Emmer
Joseph-Dollinger-Bogen 14 Aufsichtsratsvors.: A. Grundner-Culemann
D-80807 Muenchen HRB: 136055 (AG Muenchen)
Tel: +49 (0)89/32356-444 USt-IdNr.: DE813185279
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 833 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: </ripe/mail/archives/address-policy-wg/attachments/20211123/131c7803/attachment.sig>
- Previous message (by thread): [address-policy-wg] do we need a policy for avoiding "multiple unjustified LIRs"?
- Next message (by thread): [address-policy-wg] do we need a policy for avoiding "multiple unjustified LIRs"?
Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]