In message <cagdmr_e319eahxrzo985djpszgumkr7otydr_zevjqjpcrn...@mail.gmail.com> Arnaud AMELINA <[email protected]> wrote:
>C'est surprenant que l'aspect historique t'�chappe � se point sauf si ta >m�moire est brusquement devenue s�lective. Les registres sont tous appel�s >Registre R�gionaux, par cons�quence s�mantique, toutes leurs activit�s sont >r�gionales et les ressources dont elles ont la charge sont r�serv�es � leur >r�gion, pour que ces ressources se retrouvent dans une autre r�gion, il faut >une politique de transfert inter-region duement ratifi�e. Ce qui n'est pas le >cas d'Afrinic. Par cons�quent ces ressources doivent �tre utilis�es uniquement >dans sa r�gion sauf conditions exceptionnelles accord�es par d'Afrinic.� I am forced to agree that intuitively, the Regional Internet Registries were indeed created with the idea in mind that each one would serve to help develop and administer Internet number resources within their respective regions. But our shared intutive notions are not the same as what is written down, and when things end up in court, as a general rule only those things that are written down actually matter. I have some experience with courts and with litigation, so I kind of know how this works. Believe me, there are many clever lawyers on this planet who would argue, perhaps even successfully, that the Ten Commandments of Moses do not apply to their specific client because there was never a written rule requiring all the people to be able to read Hebrew. Regards, rfg
_______________________________________________ Community-Discuss mailing list [email protected] https://lists.afrinic.net/mailman/listinfo/community-discuss
