Lu, Owen is a veteran of this industry, and someone who many respect. I appreciate his posting as there are always people trying to game policy and and also far worse. I trust Owen and will be heeding his advice on this matter.
I have now reviewed your postings to most of the other policy lists, and you seem like a trouble maker. I won't bother debating policy with you and tie up APNIC lists uneccessarily. ...Skeeve *Skeeve Stevens - Senior IP Broker* *v4Now - *an eintellego Networks service [email protected] ; www.v4now.com Phone: 1300 239 038; Cell +61 (0)414 753 383 ; skype://skeeve facebook.com/v4now ; <http://twitter.com/networkceoau> linkedin.com/in/skeeve twitter.com/theispguy ; blog: www.theispguy.com ; Keybase: https://keybase.io/skeeve IP Address Brokering - Introducing sellers and buyers On Sun, Dec 6, 2015 at 8:22 PM, Owen DeLong <[email protected]> wrote: > Lu, as I stated elsewhere, I did read your post, but I do not trust you. > > Owen > > On Dec 6, 2015, at 01:13 , [email protected] wrote: > > I have explained the reasoning of asking it fairly well in one of the list > and Owen just didn't read it and speculate my action, fair warning, read to > Owen, do not speculate people's action on public space without ground.l, > especially such action was already explained publicly. > > On 6 Dec 2015, at 5:06 AM, Owen DeLong <[email protected]> wrote: > > Fair warning, Lu asked the identical question on the ARIN list and (I > presume the RIPE list since he left RIPE in all > the key places in the one he posted to ARIN). > > It seems to me that he may be doing some form of registry policy shopping. > > Owen > > On Dec 4, 2015, at 06:07 , Skeeve Stevens <[email protected]> wrote: > > Hi Lu, > > 1st: I would say no. There are no followups after allocation and there > should not be due to the many complication issues that can happen. > > 2nd: I would say no. The changing of network infrastructure should NOT > invalidate the original request which is approved. > > > > ...Skeeve > > *Skeeve Stevens - Senior IP Broker* > *v4Now - *an eintellego Networks service > [email protected] ; www.v4now.com > Phone: 1300 239 038; Cell +61 (0)414 753 383 ; skype://skeeve > facebook.com/v4now ; <http://twitter.com/networkceoau> > linkedin.com/in/skeeve > twitter.com/theispguy ; blog: www.theispguy.com ; Keybase: > https://keybase.io/skeeve > > IP Address Brokering - Introducing sellers and buyers > > On Fri, Dec 4, 2015 at 8:12 PM, Lu Heng <[email protected]> wrote: > >> Hi >> >> I have an policy question regarding the "need". >> >> We all know when RIR makes approves assignment LIR made if it is beyond >> LIR's assignment window, while the "need" has changed, the assignment >> become invalid. >> >> The question come to what the definition of need, as a young people here, >> I am a bit confused, Below I have few examples, please enlighten me if >> anyone has an thought about it. >> >> First one: >> >> Company A provides 100 customer dedicated server service at location A, >> RIR makes an assignment for 100 IP for his infrastructure, if, under >> condition that no other factor was changed, Company A moved his >> infrastructure to location B, but still providing same service to same >> customer, does the company's action need to be notified to RIR? And does >> this action considered invalid the original assignment? >> >> Second one: >> >> Company A provides web hosting service, but any casted in 3 location, and >> has provided the evidence of 3 location to the RIR during the time the >> company getting valid assignment, then A decided to cut 3 location to 2 >> location, does this invalid original assignment and need to be notified to >> RIR? >> >> So the bottom line is, what is the definition of need, is it defined as >> the service you are providing or defined as whole package of any of >> original justification material was provided, if was the later, then does >> it imply that anything, including location of the infrastructure, upstream >> providers etc has changed due to operational need, it will be considered as >> change of purpose of use and need to be notified to RIR? >> >> What should be the right interpretation of the policy by then? >> >> -- >> -- >> Kind regards. >> Lu >> >> >> * sig-policy: APNIC SIG on resource management policy >> * >> _______________________________________________ >> sig-policy mailing list >> [email protected] >> http://mailman.apnic.net/mailman/listinfo/sig-policy >> >> > * sig-policy: APNIC SIG on resource management policy > * > _______________________________________________ > sig-policy mailing list > [email protected] > http://mailman.apnic.net/mailman/listinfo/sig-policy > > > >
* sig-policy: APNIC SIG on resource management policy * _______________________________________________ sig-policy mailing list [email protected] http://mailman.apnic.net/mailman/listinfo/sig-policy
