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]/
[members-discuss] RIPE NCC response time
- Previous message (by thread): [members-discuss] RIPE NCC response time
- Next message (by thread): [members-discuss] RIPE NCC response time
Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
Hank Nussbacher
hank at efes.iucc.ac.il
Mon Jun 22 08:04:13 CEST 2009
At 07:45 AM 22-06-09 +0200, Patrick Kambach wrote: >-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- >Hash: SHA1 > >hi Hank, > >yes, the response time listed in the graph are not "accurate". Regarding >the "moves" from LIR to LIR I got the following reply on my own request: > >- --- >We did not forget about your request. We are currently drafting a >procedure document for this process which will become publicly >available soon. As soon as the procedure has been published we will >move the resources in question from de.xxxxx over to >de.connectingbytes as requested. >- --- > >So I guess it will just take some time. That it didn't come into the >RIPE's mind, that *some* LIR's will have to move some PI / ASN is >"strange" ;) They did consider it as detailed in section B of Impact of Policy on RIPE NCC Operations/Services inside: http://www.ripe.net/ripe/policies/proposals/2007-01.html I guess from Aug 2008 till now hasn't been enough time for RIPE NCC to get up to speed on this. Nonetheless, that doesn't excuse their "altering" their response time stats to show stellar response time. -Hank
- Previous message (by thread): [members-discuss] RIPE NCC response time
- Next message (by thread): [members-discuss] RIPE NCC response time
Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]