Re: [address-policy-wg] IPv6 assignment for the RIPE meetingnetwork
-
To: Marco Hogewoning marcoh@localhost
-
From: Andreas Schachtner andreas@localhost
-
Date: Wed, 03 Dec 2008 17:18:16 +0100
-
Cc: Stream Service info@localhost, Address policy address-policy-wg@localhost, Andreas Schachtner Andreas@localhost
-
Comments: In-reply-to Marco Hogewoning marcoh@localhost message dated "Wed, 03 Dec 2008 17:03:40 +0100."
...
> Yeah and make sure the entity is registered outside of the NCC service
> region so any conflict of interest can be avoided :)
>
> No really, don't you think this goes a bit too far ? Like Gert already
> posted, Remco made a suggestion which seems to be far and
> straightforward and if we get stuck in the 'NCC can't sign with
> themselves' I'm perfectly happy to have a chat with our sponsoring
> dept and run the request via our LIR so there is no need for the NCC
> to sign a direct enduser agreement.
I support such a pragmatic approach instead of forming new entities. You never
get rid of those, you know :-)
Andreas
Attachment:
pgpiGasPxBaPu.pgp
Description: PGP signature
|