Re: [address-policy-wg] 2015-01 Proposal Accepted and Implemented?(Alignment of Transfer Requirements for IPv4 Allocations)
* Gert Doering (Funny that people didn't complain when we changed the IPv6 allocation policy to permit /35 holders to extend their existing allocation to a /32 just by asking for it - *that* was a retroactive change of policy...) Indeed. Or when we allowed transfers in the first place. Or when we allowed LIRs to make end-user assignments without filling in forms. Or when we further extended the /32 to /29 to accomodate for 6RD. Or when we allowed people to register any number of end-user assignments as a single AGGREGATED-BY-LIR object. Or... Tore
[address-policy-wg] Fwd: 2015-01 Proposal Accepted and Implemented (Alignment of Transfer Requirements for IPv4 Allocations)
Hello, The allocations made before the date of this announcement, should be governed by the old politics. is not serious things apply retroactively. On exhaustion, RIPE Why is not like other RIRs? Because RIPE accepts LIRs outside the region? without having a registered company and physical address in the RIPE Region? Other ARIN RIR as it met. Regards. David
