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] 2012-07's direct engagement option
- Previous message (by thread): [ncc-services-wg] 2012-07's direct engagement option
- Next message (by thread): [ncc-services-wg] 2012-07's direct engagement option
Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
Tore Anderson
tore at fud.no
Mon Apr 21 14:11:13 CEST 2014
* Sander Steffann > As long as the argument is 'can we get rid of this because nobody > needs it', Precisely. I don't currently understand who would possibly need or want this option, given that the other options available seems better in every possible way. But then again, I might be missing something - which is why I brought it up. If a good reason for keeping the option does exist, then I would like to educate myself about it, so that I can make an informed decision when casting my vote (or possibly abstaining) at the GM. > and not 'can we get rid of this because the NCC doesn't/won't > implement it (in a usable form) anyway' then I don't mind :) As far as I can tell, the NCC's proposal will, if approved, faithfully implement 2012-07's "DAU" option. Whether or not that option is useful to anyone is a different question entirely - the answer to that question is what I'm looking for here. Tore
- Previous message (by thread): [ncc-services-wg] 2012-07's direct engagement option
- Next message (by thread): [ncc-services-wg] 2012-07's direct engagement option
Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]