[ncc-services-wg] Policy proposal for services to legacy Internet resource holders
- Previous message (by thread): [ncc-services-wg] Policy proposal for services to legacy Internet resource holders
- Next message (by thread): [ncc-services-wg] Policy proposal for services to legacy Internet resource holders
Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
Nigel Titley
nigel at titley.com
Wed Aug 29 13:59:45 CEST 2012
On 29/08/2012 11:18, Carsten Schiefner wrote: > Hi Nigel, > > On 29.08.2012 12:08, Nigel Titley wrote: >> This actually raises an interesting issue. Are there any circumstances >> in which RIPE policy would apply to legacy space? Could, for example, >> the AP-WG unilaterally propose a policy that annexed legacy space? I've >> heard this suggested several times. And of course, if RIPE policy >> doesn't apply to legacy space, why are the legacy holders raising a >> proposal at all? > > maybe it should be looked at the other way round: that legacy space > holders as good netizens want to unilaterally move this address space > under a policy, given that the policy serves their needs and views? Well, actually the proposal explicitly precludes moving the address space under normal address policy. It explicitly says that "...[such future revisions] must never restrict the rights of Legacy Resource Holders to their legacy resources." Nigel
- Previous message (by thread): [ncc-services-wg] Policy proposal for services to legacy Internet resource holders
- Next message (by thread): [ncc-services-wg] Policy proposal for services to legacy Internet resource holders
Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]