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/members-discuss@ripe.net/
[members-discuss] [comms] [ncc-announce] [news] RIPE NCC Members and Multiple
- Previous message (by thread): [members-discuss] [comms] [ncc-announce] [news] RIPE NCC Members and Multiple
- Next message (by thread): [members-discuss] [comms] [ncc-announce] [news] RIPE NCC Members and Multiple
Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
Matthias Šubik
matthias.subik at ucnd.at
Thu Feb 18 17:06:18 CET 2016
> On 18.02.2016, at 00:45, Jérôme Nicolle <jerome at ceriz.fr> wrote: > ... > So let's forbid new LIRs from transfer before, well, at least 5 years, > that should help with regulating this mess. Nobody needs to transfer, it is only convenient to save the LIR cost. If the LIR cost is covered, you can open as many LIRs in separate companies. The problem isn’t the transfer, as you could run multiple LIRs from one office, the problem is, that it is not affordable for new ISPs, but last /8 was exactly targeted on *new* operations, not old operations trying to get more addresses. Matthias
- Previous message (by thread): [members-discuss] [comms] [ncc-announce] [news] RIPE NCC Members and Multiple
- Next message (by thread): [members-discuss] [comms] [ncc-announce] [news] RIPE NCC Members and Multiple
Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]