[db-wg] Proposal to limit the use of the RIPE-NCC-RPSL-MNT on mnt-by
- Previous message (by thread): [db-wg] Proposal to limit the use of the RIPE-NCC-RPSL-MNT on mnt-by
- Next message (by thread): [db-wg] Control over associating objects for number blocks
Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
Nick Hilliard
nick at inex.ie
Sat Oct 24 16:37:07 CEST 2015
On 23/10/2015 12:53, Shane Kerr wrote: > I suppose that's fine, but to be honest experience has shown that > people either fix their information very quickly after notification, or > wait until the very last minute, or only discover that they were > supposed to do something much later. > > Based on this I'm kind of in favor of short(ish) migration periods - why > have a long period in the middle when nothing much happens? because: people on holidays, change management, extended breaks during december, general business, people being, etc. In the worst case, this is 4 reminder emails, which removes almost all possibility for people to complain about adequate notice for something which might matter to them. Is this such a bad thing? Nick
- Previous message (by thread): [db-wg] Proposal to limit the use of the RIPE-NCC-RPSL-MNT on mnt-by
- Next message (by thread): [db-wg] Control over associating objects for number blocks
Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
[ db-wg Archives ]