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] comments on proposal 2012-07
- Previous message (by thread): [ncc-services-wg] comments on proposal 2012-07
- Next message (by thread): [ncc-services-wg] comments on proposal 2012-07
Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
Nick Hilliard
nick at netability.ie
Fri Nov 1 18:38:13 CET 2013
On 01/11/2013 17:27, Sander Steffann wrote: > > Section 2.4 is redundant. We have a well established precedent under the > > terms of 2007-01 for engaging with sponsoring LIRs and this seems to work > > well in practice. Creating this policy option merely adds cost to the RIPE > > NCC's bottom line for no gain. > This option actually comes from 2007-01, which created RIPE-452: It does indeed - the point wasn't lost on me. However the NCC membership approved an NCC board proposal in Nov 2011 that it would no longer provide this option, and now there is no such option available for PI holders. In retrospect I think this is a more sensible way of handling the contractual relationship. Nick
- Previous message (by thread): [ncc-services-wg] comments on proposal 2012-07
- Next message (by thread): [ncc-services-wg] comments on proposal 2012-07
Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]