[anti-abuse-wg] RIPE policy
- Previous message (by thread): [anti-abuse-wg] RIPE policy
- Next message (by thread): [anti-abuse-wg] RIPE policy
Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
Leo Vegoda
leo.vegoda at icann.org
Wed Mar 9 01:08:55 CET 2011
On Mar 8, 2011, at 3:57 PM, "Ronald F. Guilmette" <rfg at tristatelogic.com> wrote: [...] > >> >>> Rather, I was wondering more about the apparent >>> re-assignment (re-selling?) of RIPE IP space, en mass, to parties outside >>> of the RIPE geographic jurisdiction. >> >> Do you mean selling IP connectivity to networks outside the region? That is= >> fairly common and not unreasonable. For instance, satellite connectivity p= >> roviders often have customers in fairly remote locations. > > The several cases I posted are _not_ ``satellite connectivity providers'', > and these are _not_ just, like, /28s and /29s we are talking about here. I asked you to clarify what you meant and gave an example of a legitimate situation. Asking again: do you mean selling connectivity services? Selling address blocks without connectivity is different from selling them with it. Regards, Leo
- Previous message (by thread): [anti-abuse-wg] RIPE policy
- Next message (by thread): [anti-abuse-wg] RIPE policy
Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]