On Wed, Oct 9, 2019, at 07:37, Ronald F. Guilmette wrote:
> I guess that I will have to speak to my friends in the DB working group
> about that, because there is *no* indication of this whatsoever in
> either the current -or- the historical records for the 62.222.0.0/15
> block, specifically.

Probably a less specific....
When a less specific is splitted for transfer, the transferred chunk (didn't 
check for the remaining ones, but I suppose it's the same), has the "created 
date" of the transfer, but the date in the netname retains the date of the 
initial allocation.

-- 
Radu-Adrian FEURDEAN

Reply via email to