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]/
[ncc-services-wg] legacy holders paying for registration services and 2012-07v2
- Previous message (by thread): [ncc-services-wg] legacy holders paying for registration services and 2012-07v2
- Next message (by thread): [ncc-services-wg] legacy holders paying for registration services and 2012-07v2
Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
Nick Hilliard
nick at netability.ie
Mon Feb 25 11:28:30 CET 2013
On 25/02/2013 10:21, Gert Doering wrote: > If everything works, why would they need to even think about it? e.g. to provide a credible means of rescue in the case of registry hijacking? A /16 isn't a €9.99 kettle which you can easily replace down in the local hardware shop. > So I'm not sure why a PI /16 holder would have more need for updates, > if nothing changed... The whole point is that something has changed in the situation that Daniel referred to: the legal name of the resource holder. Nick
- Previous message (by thread): [ncc-services-wg] legacy holders paying for registration services and 2012-07v2
- Next message (by thread): [ncc-services-wg] legacy holders paying for registration services and 2012-07v2
Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]