Re: [address-policy-wg] Future of Re: [policy-announce] 2015-01 Draft Document and Impact Analysis Published (Alignment of Transfer Requirements for IPv4 Allocations)

2015-06-11 Thread Tom Smyth
Sorry previous mail Garry not aimed at you My point is if consultation is closed these emails are a waste of everyones time... including this one sorry On 11 Jun 2015 15:02, Tom Smyth tom.sm...@wirelessconnect.eu wrote: I suggest add a filter in your mail if subject Re: [address-policy-wg]

[address-policy-wg] Future of Re: [policy-announce] 2015-01 Draft Document and Impact Analysis Published (Alignment of Transfer Requirements for IPv4 Allocations)

2015-06-11 Thread Garry Glendown
I will readily admit that I can not come up with a text which prevents abuse _and_ allows for valid operational needs, though. Indeed. Mergers acquisitions are real-world business events that APWG cannot affect. I see a big nut to crack on how to address abuse via illegitimate MA, including

Re: [address-policy-wg] Future of Re: [policy-announce] 2015-01 Draft Document and Impact Analysis Published (Alignment of Transfer Requirements for IPv4 Allocations)

2015-06-11 Thread Opteamax GmbH
Hi Garry, all your points are totally right. So ... when will we start writing that much stricter proposal ... I'd be happy to assist! But: announcement-validation is not a valid mechanism ... for that you'd need only one real internet connected router and a VM running e.g. bird, which announces