[anti-abuse-wg] Recent Proposals, the Taskforce & v6 Discussion
- Previous message (by thread): [anti-abuse-wg] Recent Proposals, the Taskforce & v6 Discussion
- Next message (by thread): [anti-abuse-wg] Recent Proposals, the Taskforce & v6 Discussion
Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
Brian Nisbet
brian.nisbet at heanet.ie
Thu Feb 3 15:49:16 CET 2011
Ah, right, yes, there was no actual policy proposal following that presentation and when thinking in RIPE terms proposal has a very particular term, hence the confusion. A lot of work has been done on this by the NCC, did you get a chance to read the NCC document on closure and deregistration procedure as presented at RIPE 61 in Rome (see http://www.ripe.net/legal/Closure-of-LIR-and-deregistration-of-INRs_final-draft.pdf). I linked that a couple of days ago, but it's worth repeating. Brian. "Suresh Ramasubramanian" wrote the following on 03/02/2011 14:33: > As for Uwe I was thinking of the proposals he submitted at ripe 59. > I'll ping him for a followup > > H. Recovering resources assigned to non-existing entities > http://www.ripe.net/ripe/meetings/ripe-59/presentations/rasmussen-recovering-resources.pdf > Uwe Manuel Rasmussen, Microsoft > > On Thu, Feb 3, 2011 at 3:26 PM, Brian Nisbet<brian.nisbet at heanet.ie> wrote: >> >> First off, the proposals. Suresh, I'm not sure which proposal from Uwe >> you're talking about, sorry, but Tobias& Piotr's proposals, or at least the >> addressing of the issues they identified are progressing. Tobias has been in >> discussion with the NCC DB group and the other proposals are, well, proposed >> to be dealt with by the task force. > > >
- Previous message (by thread): [anti-abuse-wg] Recent Proposals, the Taskforce & v6 Discussion
- Next message (by thread): [anti-abuse-wg] Recent Proposals, the Taskforce & v6 Discussion
Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]