Hi Lu, > 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.
Glad you are happy with that answer. I just want to state for the record that any answer on this topic given on this mailing list does not represent any official interpretation of the policy and is as such non-authoritative :) Official interpretations are only given in the Impact Analysis of a policy proposal. > (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). Nothing personal, and both Gert and I have answered your question as well as we could. Things are more complex than this answer shows though. For example changing the geographical location by itself might not make the 'need' invalid, but any changes in who/what the addresses are connected to might etc. These things are determined on a case-by-case basis by the hostmasters/IPRAs. That is why we don't discuss specific cases on the mailing list. A mailing list never has the full data, and speculating what hostmasters would decide would undermine their work. We have an arbitration system for cases where people disagree. Cheers, Sander
