Re: [sig-policy] Address Transfer Policy Proposal
Hash: SHA1
Hi all
> How about the others who've commented in the last days? Anybody else?
Yes, I'm comfortable with this change as well.
- From the discussion on this list within the past few weeks,
I would say that this will gain more support
and I ask plan B be withdrawn from the table
(if it hasn't been already)
so we can finalize this proposal.
I don't think Masato-san will object to me saying so here.
Regards,
Seiichi
Andy Linton wrote:
> On 18/07/2009, at 22:35 , Philip Smith wrote:
>
>> Agreed, we don't need reference to the EC for the reason you state,
>> Terry. I think the second and third paras could simply be merged as:
>>
>> ----
>> Under exceptional circumstances a member may submit an application for
>> further assignments or allocations earlier than this time. The APNIC
>> secretariat will monitor these exceptional requests carefully and
>> publish comprehensive statistics on a regular basis. Without
>> identifying any member organization, these statistics will record the
>> numbers of requests and the outcome, the economy that the requests
>> come
>> from and clearly identify if any member has made more that one request
>> under these provisions.
>> ----
>
>
> Philip,
>
> I'm comfortable with this change - I'm guessing Terry will be as well.
>
> How about the others who've commented in the last days? Anybody else?
>
> Regards,
> andy
>
>
> * 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
>
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.6 (MingW32)
iD8DBQFKZYk5crhTYfxyMkIRAn1DAJ9fnhI0rdxGon2MMLNealfbyouEzACdEg+k
S3CLGPe7AAMeJs7UZD9BaiY=
=ngla
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----