Hi Lu,
just to be clear on this - since your question was a hypothetical one about something that might have been policy at some point (but certainly not current policy), your question wasn't strictly a policy question, and could be very well seen as speculative. Given the subject of your question, I can fully understand why people have reservations about this discussion. Kind regards Remco > On 04 Dec 2015, at 10:15 , Lu Heng <[email protected]> wrote: > > Hi > > Thanks Vladislav for the clear answer. > > And for the list, this is an answer I would like to receive, clear and easy. > > The example was very simple so I was expecting an simple answer as well. > > (I got an feeling that anything I say in the list was wrong, I hope it does > not become personal again, I am asking a policy question in a policy > discussion mailing list and nothing more than that). > > On Fri, Dec 4, 2015 at 10:10 AM, <[email protected] <mailto:[email protected]>> wrote: > Hello, > > > > To answer your question you can look at the obsoleted forms used for > “registering” an assignment. There was no particular points to geographic > locations of a network, so relocation the untouched set of assets to another > place (or even changing them in the margins of the initial request) did not > require a new request/notification. It was the answer to the first question. > > The second question is more complex. But it seems removing one of the > locations did not change the need for the assigned /24, so the answer to the > question should be the same as the previous one. > > > > Regards, > > Vladislav Potapov > > Ru.iiat > > > > From: address-policy-wg [mailto:[email protected] > <mailto:[email protected]>] On Behalf Of Lu Heng > Sent: Thursday, December 3, 2015 2:27 PM > To: [email protected] <mailto:[email protected]> > Subject: [address-policy-wg] An interesting policy question > > > > Hi > > > > I have an policy question regarding Ripe policy before adoption of "no need" > policy. > > > > We all know that before the no need policy, when Ripe makes an assignment, > while the "need" has changed, the assignment become invalid. > > > > The question come to what the definition of need. Below I have few examples, > please provide your view: > > > > First one: > > > > Company A provides 100 customer dedicated server service at location A, Ripe > 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 > > > > > -- > -- > Kind regards. > Lu >
signature.asc
Description: Message signed with OpenPGP using GPGMail
