[address-policy-wg] [policy-announce] 2012-04 New Draft Document Published (PI Assignments from the last /8)
- Previous message (by thread): [address-policy-wg] [policy-announce] 2012-04 New Draft Document Published (PI Assignments from the last /8)
- Next message (by thread): [address-policy-wg] [policy-announce] 2012-04 New Draft Document Published (PI Assignments from the last /8)
Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
Sascha Luck
lists-ripe at c4inet.net
Mon Sep 10 17:34:51 CEST 2012
On Mon, Sep 10, 2012 at 04:14:37PM +0100, Nick Hilliard wrote: >This is an extraordinarily discriminatory position. > >In fact I find it not just to be unfair, but dramatically anti- competitive >as the LIRs could be seen as harbouring the remaining IPv4 address space >for members of their own club. Good point, if someone were to take that to court or the competition commissar. >By rejecting this proposal, this discrimination against End User >requirements will be permanently enshrined in RIPE policy and that they >won't get the opportunity to apply for reclaimed address space in future. >Again, I find this to compound the implicit unfairness of excluding them in >the first place. Possible compromise: make *returned/reclaimed* PI assignments available for assignment as PI rather than using them to make up patchwork PA allocations... rgds, Sascha Luck
- Previous message (by thread): [address-policy-wg] [policy-announce] 2012-04 New Draft Document Published (PI Assignments from the last /8)
- Next message (by thread): [address-policy-wg] [policy-announce] 2012-04 New Draft Document Published (PI Assignments from the last /8)
Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]