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]/
[db-wg] Decision on NWI-4 INETNUM status values
- Previous message (by thread): [db-wg] Decision on NWI-4 INETNUM status values
- Next message (by thread): [db-wg] Decision on NWI-4 INETNUM status values
Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
Leo Vegoda
leo at vegoda.org
Mon Apr 4 19:08:47 CEST 2022
Hi, On Mon, Apr 4, 2022 at 5:39 AM denis walker via db-wg <db-wg at ripe.net> wrote: [...] > If there are no objections to this, the co-chairs now ask the RIPE NCC > to produce an impact/implementation report to add this new status > value and include the business rules to restrict it's use. We will > then seek a final approval from the community on the report. I don't object to addressing this. But I think there are some implicit assumptions in the text from 2016. I'd like to understand if there is a technical need for exact match assignments that duplicate all the contact and other information from the /24 allocation. Or is the issue that there is some policy or administrative need? Kind regards, Leo
- Previous message (by thread): [db-wg] Decision on NWI-4 INETNUM status values
- Next message (by thread): [db-wg] Decision on NWI-4 INETNUM status values
Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
[ db-wg Archives ]