[address-policy-wg] 2016-03 Discussion Period extended until 15 July 2016 (Locking Down the Final /8 Policy)
- Previous message (by thread): [address-policy-wg] 2016-03 Discussion Period extended until 15 July 2016 (Locking Down the Final /8 Policy)
- Next message (by thread): [address-policy-wg] another way to achieve the original motives of post-exhaustion policy
Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
Mozafary Mohammad
mozafary at greenweb.ir
Sat Jun 18 09:44:14 CEST 2016
I'm agree with Arash. On 6/18/2016 9:37 AM, Arash Naderpour wrote: > Hi, > > This policy can affect the members that already received some /22 or smaller > blocks (from 185/8 range) from the market. They already paid to sellers to > obtain those blocks and this policy make it impossible for them to transfer > it out later if they don't need it. > > I'm opposing the policy, it make unnecessary limitation and put a part of > community in an unfair situation. If returning an allocation is something > visible it can be done to any allocation, not just the smallest ones. > > Regards, > > Arash Naderpour > > > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: <https://lists.ripe.net/ripe/mail/archives/address-policy-wg/attachments/20160618/fd2f2b7b/attachment.html>
- Previous message (by thread): [address-policy-wg] 2016-03 Discussion Period extended until 15 July 2016 (Locking Down the Final /8 Policy)
- Next message (by thread): [address-policy-wg] another way to achieve the original motives of post-exhaustion policy
Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]