erik,
> I think that the time for the temp assignment to be made, stretched to
> 1 year or more, will become an issue for the NCC to work with.
the current policy allows the ncc to go up to a year
> Not only of the point that Gert made, but also because it will make
> the life of the IPRA's
> On 28 Jan 2022, at 11:20, Daniel Karrenberg wrote:
>
> How about giving the RIPE NCC discretion to make sensible decisions about the
> corner case ‘scientific experiment’ after getting advice from a panel of
> scientists?
> Or delegating the decisions to such a panel?
This would be a
Hi Randy,
I think that the time for the temp assignment to be made, stretched to 1 year
or more, will become an issue for the NCC to work with.
It is my personal view / feeling, that not many requests are done to the NCC
for longer periods than specified in the policy.. And this looks like
On Fri, Jan 28, 2022 at 3:21 AM Daniel Karrenberg wrote:
[...]
> How about giving the RIPE NCC discretion to make sensible decisions
> about the corner case ‘scientific experiment’ after getting advice
> from a panel of scientists?
> Or delegating the decisions to such a panel?
Something
That look to me as a good approach.
That will be a good way to handle "really needed" IPv4 experiments, which I
don't think are relevant anymore, but I'm happy to support if there are good
and needed cases considering the good of the overall community.
The negative part is the overhead of the
Dear apWG members,
Hope this email finds you in good health.
Please see my comments below, inline...
Le jeudi 27 janvier 2022, JORDI PALET MARTINEZ via address-policy-wg <
address-policy-wg@ripe.net> a écrit :
> I'm not convinced that we should "today", provide IPv4 temporary
> assignments,
I have the strong suspicion that this is another example of trying to
codify special/corner cases. Doing this takes disproportionate amounts
of energy and causes an ever increasing amount of undesired side
effects.
How about giving the RIPE NCC discretion to make sensible decisions
