[ncc-services-wg] 2012-07 New Draft Document and Impact Analysis Published (RIPE NCC Services to Legacy Internet Resource Holders)
- Previous message (by thread): [ncc-services-wg] 2012-07 New Draft Document and Impact Analysis Published (RIPE NCC Services to Legacy Internet Resource Holders)
- Next message (by thread): [ncc-services-wg] 2012-07 New Draft Document and Impact Analysis Published (RIPE NCC Services to Legacy Internet Resource Holders)
Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
Niall O'Reilly
niall.oreilly at ucd.ie
Tue Oct 22 09:53:31 CEST 2013
On 21 Oct 2013, at 15:12, Wilfried Woeber wrote: > While working through the Impact Analysis I am somewhat at a loss how > Option 1 and Option 3 are to be handled. > > In particular, going for Option 1: would the Legacy Resource lose its > status: LEGACY and be relabelled to PI or PA? No. > If this is the case, I do not see the rationale for the text in Option 3: > > In the latter case, however, it should be made clear that the RIPE > NCC will not allow the Legacy Resource Holder to become the > sponsoring LIR for its own Legacy Internet Resources. > > In case the status: LEGACY for Option 1 is preserved, then I can agree to > the restriction as quoted. > > Any clarification would be appreciated. There is an option, under section 1.2 (Scope) for relabelling, but then the resource in question is placed outside the scope of the proposed policy. I hope this helps. Best regards, Niall
- Previous message (by thread): [ncc-services-wg] 2012-07 New Draft Document and Impact Analysis Published (RIPE NCC Services to Legacy Internet Resource Holders)
- Next message (by thread): [ncc-services-wg] 2012-07 New Draft Document and Impact Analysis Published (RIPE NCC Services to Legacy Internet Resource Holders)
Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]