Re: [sig-policy] proposal prop-050-v004
It is easier to fix this now, which I believe Phil is drafting something at the moment, than passing something that could cause mess.
...Skeeve
--
Skeeve Stevens, CEO/Technical Director
eintellego Pty Ltd - The Networking Specialists
skeeve at eintellego dot net / www.eintellego.net
Phone: 1300 753 383, Fax: (+612) 8572 9954
Cell +61 (0)414 753 383 / skype://skeeve
--
NOC, NOC, who's there?
Disclaimer: Limits of Liability and Disclaimer: This message is for the named person's use only. It may contain sensitive and private proprietary or legally privileged information. You must not, directly or indirectly, use, disclose, distribute, print, or copy any part of this message if you are not the intended recipient. eintellego Pty Ltd and each legal entity in the Tefilah Pty Ltd group of companies reserve the right to monitor all e-mail communications through its networks. Any views expressed in this message are those of the individual sender, except where the message states otherwise and the sender is authorised to state them to be the views of any such entity. Any reference to costs, fee quotations, contractual transactions and variations to contract terms is subject to separate confirmation in writing signed by an authorised representative of eintellego. Whilst all efforts are made to safeguard inbound and outbound e-mails, we cannot guarantee that attachments are virus-free or compatible with your systems and do not accept any liability in respect of viruses or computer problems experienced.
> -----Original Message-----
> From: sig-policy-bounces at lists dot apnic dot net [mailto:sig-policy-
> bounces at lists dot apnic dot net] On Behalf Of Matt RobbMarkham
> Sent: Monday, 9 March 2009 1:21 PM
> To: sig-policy at lists dot apnic dot net
> Subject: [sig-policy] proposal prop-050-v004
>
> Hi all, I agree with Andy Linton that the proposal prop-050-v004 should
> go ahead as agreed at APNIC27.
> I don't think anyone thinks that this is a perfect policy but I believe
> it is better than not having a policy to deal with address transfers.
>
> As other members have noted there are questions that remain unanswered
> with this policy but Philip has already started a process to address
> some of these shortcomings. We are all free to do the same, to create
> complimentary proposals that aid this one. I don't think this policy
> should be abandoned due only to some potential abuse of it by members,
> given that the host masters have existing policy to address this.
>
> I support this policy even if it is not totally polished.
>
> Regards
>
> Matt RobbMarkham
> Network Engineer
> Advanced Management Systems Ltd
> +649 9176528
> matt at ams dot co dot nz
>
> Attention:
> This communication is confidential and may be legally privileged. If
> you are not the intended recipient, please do not use, disclose, copy
> or distribute it, other than to return it to us with your confirmation
> that it has been deleted from your system.
> * sig-policy: APNIC SIG on resource management policy
> *
> _______________________________________________
> sig-policy mailing list
> sig-policy at lists dot apnic dot net
> http://mailman.apnic.net/mailman/listinfo/sig-policy