[address-policy-wg] 2016-03 New Version and Impact Analysis Published (Locking Down the Final /8 Policy)
- Previous message (by thread): [address-policy-wg] 2016-03 New Version and Impact Analysis Published (Locking Down the Final /8 Policy)
- Next message (by thread): [address-policy-wg] 2016-03 New Version and Impact Analysis Published (Locking Down the Final /8 Policy)
Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
Jan Ingvoldstad
frettled at gmail.com
Wed Oct 19 15:28:05 CEST 2016
On Wed, Oct 19, 2016 at 3:01 PM, Roger Jørgensen <rogerj at gmail.com> wrote: > > Guess it's a last resort when they see that they are running out of > arguments? And amazing that > some people have turned to "personal" attacks here rather than > discussing the policy at hand. > > > Either way - well handled Gert, you got my full support. > I agree completely, thanks for voicing it that way. Regarding the policy at hand, even considering Nick Hillard's argument > it's hard to not support > this policy. It at least try to solve a almost impossible problem to > solve, better to do some > than nothing? So a clear support from me. > I support the proposal. The current text appears sufficiently improved to address the concerns raised, as I see it. -- Jan -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: <https://lists.ripe.net/ripe/mail/archives/address-policy-wg/attachments/20161019/f14a71b8/attachment.html>
- Previous message (by thread): [address-policy-wg] 2016-03 New Version and Impact Analysis Published (Locking Down the Final /8 Policy)
- Next message (by thread): [address-policy-wg] 2016-03 New Version and Impact Analysis Published (Locking Down the Final /8 Policy)
Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]