[address-policy-wg] An interesting policy question
- Previous message (by thread): [address-policy-wg] An interesting policy question
- Next message (by thread): [address-policy-wg] An interesting policy question
Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
Lu Heng
h.lu at anytimechinese.com
Fri Dec 4 10:15:09 CET 2015
Hi Thanks Vladislav for the clear answer. And for the list, this is an answer I would like to receive, clear and easy. The example was very simple so I was expecting an simple answer as well. (I got an feeling that anything I say in the list was wrong, I hope it does not become personal again, I am asking a policy question in a policy discussion mailing list and nothing more than that). On Fri, Dec 4, 2015 at 10:10 AM, <poty at iiat.ru> wrote: > Hello, > > > > To answer your question you can look at the obsoleted forms used for > “registering” an assignment. There was no particular points to geographic > locations of a network, so relocation the untouched set of assets to > another place (or even changing them in the margins of the initial request) > did not require a new request/notification. It was the answer to the first > question. > > The second question is more complex. But it seems removing one of the > locations did not change *the need* for the assigned /24, so the answer > to the question should be the same as the previous one. > > > > Regards, > > Vladislav Potapov > > Ru.iiat > > > > *From:* address-policy-wg [mailto:address-policy-wg-bounces at ripe.net] *On > Behalf Of *Lu Heng > *Sent:* Thursday, December 3, 2015 2:27 PM > *To:* address-policy-wg at ripe.net > *Subject:* [address-policy-wg] An interesting policy question > > > > Hi > > > > I have an policy question regarding Ripe policy before adoption of "no > need" policy. > > > > We all know that before the no need policy, when Ripe makes an assignment, > while the "need" has changed, the assignment become invalid. > > > > The question come to what the definition of need. Below I have few > examples, please provide your view: > > > > First one: > > > > Company A provides 100 customer dedicated server service at location A, > Ripe makes an assignment for 100 IP for his infrastructure, if, under > condition that no other factor was changed, Company A moved his > infrastructure to location B, but still providing same service to same > customer, does the company's action need to be notified to RIR? And does > this action considered invalid the original assignment? > > > > Second one: > > > > Company A provides web hosting service, but any casted in 3 location, and > has provided the evidence of 3 location to the RIR during the time the > company getting valid assignment, then A decided to cut 3 location to 2 > location, does this invalid original assignment and need to be notified to > RIR? > > > > So the bottom line is, what is the definition of need, is it defined as > the service you are providing or defined as whole package of any of > original justification material was provided, if was the later, then does > it imply that anything, including location of the infrastructure, upstream > providers etc has changed due to operational need, it will be considered as > change of purpose of use and need to be notified to RIR? > > > > What should be the right interpretation of the policy by then? > > > > -- > > -- > Kind regards. > Lu > -- -- Kind regards. Lu -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: <https://lists.ripe.net/ripe/mail/archives/address-policy-wg/attachments/20151204/23535547/attachment.html>
- Previous message (by thread): [address-policy-wg] An interesting policy question
- Next message (by thread): [address-policy-wg] An interesting policy question
Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]