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] RU goverment IP revoke
- Previous message (by thread): [address-policy-wg] RU goverment IP revoke
- Next message (by thread): [address-policy-wg] RU goverment IP revoke
Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
Jim Reid
jim at rfc1035.com
Tue Mar 1 08:48:43 CET 2022
> On 1 Mar 2022, at 07:21, Mathias Westerlund <mathias.westerlund at wdmab.se> wrote: > > While i fully support ukraine in these tough times and can easily say i will do what i can against russia, i would like to remind you that there is a difference between talking about lawful sanctions and us implementing them versus outright cyber attack requests which at least i feel is not for this forum. No matter how justified. I agree 100%. The NCC *MUST* remain neutral no matter how much we oppose the attack on Ukraine. It's the start of a very slippery slope if we (for some definition of we) start taking decisions about who does and doesn't get numbering resources. Or freezing/withdrawing those that have already been allocated. [Apart from the usual sanctions when an LIR is in breach of the membership agreement, say by not paying.] Those decisions have to be taken elsewhere: ie the Dutch courts. There's no need for the NCC to intervene here. Those who want to make life difficult for the Russian government can take their own decisions about which prefixes get advertised or dropped by their routers.
- Previous message (by thread): [address-policy-wg] RU goverment IP revoke
- Next message (by thread): [address-policy-wg] RU goverment IP revoke
Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]