[anti-abuse-wg] Reclamation/current policy
- Previous message (by thread): [anti-abuse-wg] Reclamation/current policy (was: Re: Allocation of number resources)
- Next message (by thread): [anti-abuse-wg] Reclamation/current policy (was: Re: Allocation of number resources)
Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
Brian Nisbet
brian.nisbet at heanet.ie
Mon Feb 11 16:14:45 CET 2013
Ronald, Ronald F. Guilmette wrote the following on 09/02/2013 20:33: > In message <5116686A.8020208 at heanet.ie>, > Brian Nisbet <brian.nisbet at heanet.ie> wrote: > >> Ronald F. Guilmette wrote, On 08/02/2013 20:07: >>> >>> It would appear that a newer revision of this document exists: >>> >>> https://www.ripe.net/ripe/docs/ripe-541 >> >> Sorry, my mistake, I picked the wrong version. 541 has also been updated: >> >> https://www.ripe.net/ripe/docs/ripe-578 >> >> Can you just check your questions still apply to this version? > > Yes, they still do apply. > > I would still like to know why Section B.1.b apparently says that RIPE > NCC _might_ reclaim the improperly allocated resources whereas Section > B.1.e says quite clearly that RIPE NCC "will" reclaim the resources. > > Again, my question is: Was this difference in wording intentional and > deliberate? Or was it inadvertant and unintended? If the NCC, who authored the document, don't come along and answer soon, I'll take it up with them directly. Brian
- Previous message (by thread): [anti-abuse-wg] Reclamation/current policy (was: Re: Allocation of number resources)
- Next message (by thread): [anti-abuse-wg] Reclamation/current policy (was: Re: Allocation of number resources)
Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]