I don’t think there is such thing (formally speaking), and is not.
Regards,
Jordi
@jordipalet
El 12/9/22, 14:24, "Martin Hannigan" escribió:
On Mon, Sep 12, 2022 at 08:02 JORDI PALET MARTINEZ via ARIN-PPML
wrote:
Hi Martin,
No, is not a global policy
Hi Martin,
No, is not a global policy, they are only meant for IANA-RIR matters.
We just mention what is the actual situation in other RIRs, also because we
have submitted similar policies, but as we all know, it may happen in one
region and not in others.
Regards,
Jordi
@jordipale
Hi Marco,
Small clarification from our side. We actually checked this with the policy
officer around March-April-May 2022, if I recall correctly.
What we got from that email exchange was that "leasing" is not defined, but
also was not explicitly allowed neither disallowed as a valid justificati
may happen that many parts of the text are
"enforceable" for you and not for me (or viceversa) ... but the fact is that
we, as a community, are accepting that by consensus.
El 28/10/21 9:48, "William Herrin" escribió:
On Thu, Oct 28, 2021 at 12:23 AM JORDI PALET MARTINEZ
/21 4:41, "William Herrin" escribió:
On Wed, Oct 27, 2021 at 2:07 PM JORDI PALET MARTINEZ via ARIN-PPML
wrote:
> However, right now 2 above doesn’t exist and instead
> if we keep using email but making a policy that enforces
> a transition to X-ARF/RFC5965/RF
Yes, I did, but *only* in order to make sure that the status of the abuse-c
polices is known in the list for what is worth on this discussion, because I
assume that not everyone follows/contributes to the policies in the 5 RIRs as
it is my case (probably just a very few folks).
I think it is
> On Oct 27, 2021, at 09:40 , JORDI PALET MARTINEZ via ARIN-PPML
wrote:
>
> It doesn't work if emails aren't validated at least a couple of times per
year.
Meh… Doable, but expensive.
> It doesn't work if the policy doesn't enforce that
interested in that effort.
Regards,
Jordi
@jordipalet
El 27/10/21 21:47, "Owen DeLong" escribió:
On Oct 27, 2021, at 01:12 , JORDI PALET MARTINEZ via ARIN-PPML
wrote:
Hi Owen, all,
Responding in-line as [Jordi]
I will once again urge you to get an MUA
It doesn't work if emails aren't validated at least a couple of times per year.
It doesn't work if the policy doesn't enforce that the resource actually
addresses the abuse cases.
It doesn't work if the policy allows an auto-responder that enforces a form
submission.
Ideally, we, as a global c
Maybe I should review and resubmit my abuse-c proposal now that it is clear
that at least in other 2 RIRs is being a success?
https://www.arin.net/vault/policy/proposals/ARIN_prop_264_orig.html
https://www.arin.net/vault/policy/proposals/2019_5.html
Regards,
Jordi
@jordipalet
El 27/10/2
Hi Owen, all,
Responding in-line as [Jordi]
Saludos,
Jordi
@jordipalet
El 27/10/21 8:06, "Owen DeLong" escribió:
On Oct 26, 2021, at 15:17 , JORDI PALET MARTINEZ via ARIN-PPML
wrote:
Hi,
Unless I misunderstood this proposal, I believe this is
ML en nombre de JORDI PALET MARTINEZ via ARIN-PPML"
escribió:
Hi,
Unless I misunderstood this proposal, I believe this is the wrong way to go.
Is this proposal suggesting that the abuse email must not be used anymore and
instead a URL for abuse reports enforced?
If you look at all the ot
Hi,
Unless I misunderstood this proposal, I believe this is the wrong way to go.
Is this proposal suggesting that the abuse email must not be used anymore and
instead a URL for abuse reports enforced?
If you look at all the other 4 RIRs, this is totally contrary to the practical
experience.
I
Renumbering is possible, but you are missing in your list implications such as
renumbering the DNS and making sure that the servers work with the old and the
new addresses for some hours, interruptions in live session, etc., etc.
Regards,
Jordi
@jordipalet
El 13/9/21 19:44, "ARIN-
Definitively any organization or even an individual user that want to have its
own IPv6 PI must be able to get it.
Anything that can promote ULA+NTPv6 (which by the way it is an experimental
protocol, not to be used in production), is evil and for that, we better don’t
waste our time to move
My fault … For some reason yesterday night I was misreading from your email
that the AC is elected by community, not membership (which is what I recalled).
El 8/9/21 1:45, "John Curran" escribió:
On 7 Sep 2021, at 5:12 PM, arin-ppml wrote:
I was also recalling that the AC was elect
I was also recalling that the AC was elected by membership as well, and I just
found that in the PDP:
“To accomplish this goal, the PDP charges the member-elected ARIN Advisory
Council (AC) as the primary facilitators of the policy development process with
appropriate checks and balances on
Unless I recall it incorrectly, they are elected by the *membership* not the
*community*. There is a huge difference.
In other regions, the chairs of the PDP are elected by the community. The board
is still elected by the membership, but the board has nothing to say in regards
to PDP/policy
Hi Anthony,
As said, I will be happy to support any proposal that works, and consequently
withdraw mine, but there is still a nit that makes it incompatible with ARIN.
I’ve already sent you a private email a few days ago on that detail.
Regards,
Jordi
@jordipalet
El 12/10/2
Hi Mike,
No, is not compatible, there is a nit in the text that precisely makes it
against as John as confirmed. Nevertheless I only wanted to clarify the
situation, I don’t think this is a topic for a continued discussion in ARIN
ppml.
Regards,
Jordi
@jordipalet
El 12/
Let’s suppose every possible proposal author in every other RIR comes to the
list to ask questions about compatibility … it will be a mess.
I will understand that if the text of any policy in ARIN is not clear enough
for any “reader” (including an author of a possible proposal in other region
Hi all,
The issue is a much bigger one … let me try to summarize.
There are 3 different policy proposals for Inter-RIR transfers in AFRINIC, the
older one is from myself. Other people decided to submit other proposals
afterwards, when this one was already being discussed and being adapted
Hi Chris,
I guess you missed this at the end of my previous email:
https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-palet-v6ops-rfc6177-bis-02. I need to update
it!
Regards,
Jordi
@jordipalet
El 19/4/20 21:32, "ARIN-PPML en nombre de Chris Woodfield"
escribió:
I’ll admit to havin
LACNIC and AFRINIC have similar problems in the fee structure that doesn’t
incentivize the right deployment of IPv6. I’ve already made proposals to the
relevant boards to change that (it is not a matter of policies in those cases).
Many management departments of ISPs make the numbers about th
And furthermore, he is not considering that *most* of the traffic today is from
the caches (hosted by the ISPs) to the subscribers, so this is never passing
via the IX.
For example, a Netflix cache, got a copy (via IPv6) of film "A", but is being
used by 10.000 subscribers in that ISP. The tota
Hi Michel,
I'm not sure if this is a love or a war declaration ... below ...
El 7/11/19 4:08, "Michel Py" escribió:
Jordi,
I wanted to close the day on a positive note.
> Jordi wrote :
> I buy you a dinner if not, even in one of the Michelin restaurants in
Madrid i
Hi Michel,
I said google and others. There are many similar stats (ISOC, APNIC, AKAMAI,
Facebook, etc.), in fact, I think we are closer to 35% than 30%.
Can you really believe is a coincidence that all them are measuring
approximately the same figures?
You're right in one thing: is 5-10% highe
30% of *global* Internet traffic, measured by google, among others.
If you read all the details you will understand that the measurements in IX,
don't reflect average world traffic, especially when ISPs have their own caches
from Google, Facebook, Netflix, Akamai+other CDNs etc., which represent
Just in case ... support !
Regards,
Jordi
@jordipalet
El 6/11/19 18:57, "ARIN-PPML en nombre de ARIN" escribió:
The ARIN Advisory Council (AC) met on 1 November 2019 and decided to
send the following Recommended Draft Policy to Last Call:
ARIN-2019-15: Hijacking Authoriza
Hi Michael,
With all the respect, 30%+ global IPv6 traffic, I think somebody else should
open the eyes!
China already mandated it to the ISPs, even if we aren't able to measure it
correctly (yet), you can guess that being a country with 1.4 billion
inhabitants, this will, in just a couple of y
I fully support this proposal.
Sooner or later goverments will start protecting citizens against organizations
that provide services not supporting IPv6. ASAP we start making that ourselves,
by all possible means, much better than being regulated.
I've only a comment. Replace migration working
Same view here.
Regards,
Jordi
@jordipalet
El 13/10/19 9:39, "ARIN-PPML en nombre de Steven Ryerse via ARIN-PPML"
escribió:
+1
Sent from my iPhone
On Oct 12, 2019, at 6:59 PM, William Herrin wrote:
On Sat, Oct 12, 2019 at 6:29 AM wrote:
I agree. The only re
And of course, I full agree with the proposed text.
Regards,
Jordi
@jordipalet
El 22/7/19 10:56, "ARIN-PPML en nombre de ARIN" escribió:
The following has been revised:
* Draft Policy ARIN-2019-15: Hijacking Authorization Not-intended
Revised text is below and can be
Hi all,
I’ve been too busy to take care of all my emails …
I think David and Scott captured very well my intent. The point was to clarify
in the problem statement “why and when” this problem was generated.
Regards,
Jordi
@jordipalet
El 26/6/19 20:03, "ARIN-PPML en nombre d
Hi Jimmy,
The cost of doing all that has been done already for IPv4 and by other RIRs.
It is one-time development cost anyway (to adapt the changes to IPv6), so not a
giant effort. And by the way, it has been done already to allow that working
among RIPE and APNIC, and I believe there is plenty
ending an abuse
report, and it can't be handled automatically, there is always someone to take
care of it.
Regards,
Jordi
@jordipalet
El 16/7/19 23:58, "Steve Atkins" escribió:
> On Jul 16, 2019, at 6:05 PM, JORDI PALET MARTINEZ via ARIN-PPML
wrote:
>
ng of those manual tickets is
no longer in the company, and nobody realized to modify that contact.
-Scott
On Tue, Jul 16, 2019 at 10:05 AM JORDI PALET MARTINEZ via ARIN-PPML
wrote:
Hi Scott,
I guess there is some misunderstanding in that part of the text. May be
“ultimately” is
Actually I think there is something what we are missing in RIPE (copied Marco
on this), that will be very useful.
A web page as a kind of "ToC" with all the links to all policies, may be
ordered thematically (for example).
There is something close:
https://www.ripe.net/publications/docs/ripe-p
Hi Scott,
I guess there is some misunderstanding in that part of the text. May be
“ultimately” is not doing the intended “work”. The idea is “last resort”.
The idea is not that messages are processed only by humans. If it can be
automatically processed that’s fine and perfect. The goal is
Same as in IPv4. If course the difference is the size of the blocks received
from IANA, but this is comparative to the order of magnitude difference between
IPv4 and IPv6.
Regards,
Jordi
@jordipalet
El 16/7/19 5:18, "arin-ppml-boun...@arin.net en nombre de
hostmas...@uneedus.com" escribi
Could someone willing to have resources form ARIN, create a company in US,
subsidiary of a company in another RIR, justify the need, get the resources,
close the US company, and following this policy keep the ARIN resources?
I still think that ARIN-2019-10 (Inter-RIR M&A) makes more sense than t
e first place.
Albert Erdmann
Network Administrator
Paradise On Line Inc.
On Mon, 15 Jul 2019, JORDI PALET MARTINEZ via ARIN-PPML wrote:
> Hi Albert,
>
> I think you looked at the wrong RIPE documents. Unless I got it wrong,
the right document
Hi Albert,
I think you looked at the wrong RIPE documents. Unless I got it wrong, the
right document is RIPE-682, and it clearly states that IPv6 can also be
transferred (both intra and inter-RIR).
I've a similar policy proposal in LACNIC and APNIC, and working as well for
submitting in a few
Hi,
I’ve the same self-contradictory feelings, if I can say that way, as David
indicated.
El 13/7/19 19:20, "ARIN-PPML en nombre de John Curran"
escribió:
On 13 Jul 2019, at 1:53 AM, David Farmer wrote:
On Fri, Jul 12, 2019 at 12:14 PM John Curran wrote:
The problem with th
as maligning Jordi's character. Nothing of the sort was intended.
Amy
On Thu, Jul 11, 2019 at 11:31 AM JORDI PALET MARTINEZ via ARIN-PPML
wrote:
As I've said in my email, this is not about the proposal, it just reminded me
that it has been 3 months, since the minutes where pu
not changed, but it should be publicly
acknowledge that they contain false information and that should be somehow
attached also to the published minutes.
Regards,
Jordi
@jordipalet
El 11/7/19 17:21, "Jimmy Hess" escribió:
On Thu, Jul 11, 2019 at 9:03 AM JORDI PALET MARTINEZ via
Hi all, and specially the AC (as I think a response is required),
Reviewing this email, I just realized that the minutes of the 10th April 2019
minutes are still published as originally.
There are two points that I've discussed in emails and in person with several
AC members, which were clearly
And just to confirm, the other co-author agrees on all this.
Regards,
Jordi
El 17/5/19 10:06, "ARIN-PPML en nombre de Carlos Friaças via ARIN-PPML"
escribió:
On Fri, 17 May 2019, David Farmer wrote:
>
> On Fri, May 17, 2019 at 12:20 AM Michel Py
wrote:
>
Hi all,
One of the aspects being discussed regarding prop-266 is if the use rights are
exclusive or not.
While re-reading the NRPM, working in v2 of the prop-266 and trying to
understand all the different points of view from the list discussion, it looks
to me that section 2.5 of the NRPM is s
Hi John,
El 2/5/19 19:03, "John Curran" escribió:
On 2 May 2019, at 12:38 PM, JORDI PALET MARTINEZ via ARIN-PPML
wrote:
In any members association, the association is legitimated to act against
members that don’t follow the rules.
It is not a matter of “police”,
Hi John,
El 2/5/19 18:36, "John Curran" escribió:
On 2 May 2019, at 11:48 AM, JORDI PALET MARTINEZ via ARIN-PPML
wrote:
As said before, I’m fine if the RIRs don’t want to take actions, but they must
have clear rules (policy text) that allows the victims to claim by other
019 a la(s) 09:03, JORDI PALET MARTINEZ via ARIN-PPML
(arin-ppml@arin.net) escribió:
El 2/5/19 15:50, "hostmas...@uneedus.com" escribió:
On Thu, 2 May 2019, JORDI PALET MARTINEZ via ARIN-PPML wrote:
> Hi Albert,
>
> El 2/5/19 15:02, "arin-ppml
El 2/5/19 17:39, "ARIN-PPML en nombre de Nicolas Antoniello"
escribió:
ARIN (and so the other RIRs like LACNIC) are doing things to combat the problem
more effectively, like fostering RPKI deployment and so... but police stuff
remains (and I think it must remain) out of the scope of R
El 2/5/19 17:36, "ARIN-PPML en nombre de William Herrin"
escribió:
On Wed, May 1, 2019 at 11:50 PM Fernando Frediani wrote:
Why people always believe they "own" IP address space and nobody can
take it from them as if it was a router or a server purchased with a
invoice and declared
o
take actions in a much easier way, either by the RIR or by scaling it to courts
if the RIR decides not acting against a “bad faith-acting member”.
Regards,
Nicolas
El jue., 2 de may. de 2019 a la(s) 09:03, JORDI PALET MARTINEZ via ARIN-PPML
(arin-ppml@arin.net) escribió:
El 2/5/19 17:16, "ARIN-PPML en nombre de Scott Leibrand"
escribió:
Do we have any evidence that 1) a significant fraction of BGP hijacking
I will say that even if it solves a single case (going to the extreme), is good
to have it. We often do policies that have a single case. We try
El 2/5/19 15:50, "hostmas...@uneedus.com" escribió:
On Thu, 2 May 2019, JORDI PALET MARTINEZ via ARIN-PPML wrote:
> Hi Albert,
>
> El 2/5/19 15:02, "arin-ppml-boun...@arin.net en nombre de
hostmas...@uneedus.com" escribió:
Hi Joe,
El 2/5/19 15:11, "Joe Provo" escribió:
[see Disclaimer]
On Thu, May 02, 2019 at 12:30:38PM +0200, JORDI PALET MARTINEZ via
ARIN-PPML wrote:
[snip]
> So, you???re saying that if an ARIN member is *acting* against
> the exclusive rights
Hi Albert,
El 2/5/19 15:02, "arin-ppml-boun...@arin.net en nombre de
hostmas...@uneedus.com" escribió:
On Thu, 2 May 2019, JORDI PALET MARTINEZ via ARIN-PPML wrote:
>2. CONDITIONS OF SERVICE
>
>(1) The exclusive right to be the registrant of
Hi Owen,
El 2/5/19 11:23, "Owen DeLong" escribió:
Speaking only for myself...
On May 2, 2019, at 00:55 , JORDI PALET MARTINEZ via ARIN-PPML
wrote:
Hi Owen,
I think that the comparison with a property is not good, so I'm top posting to
make it simple.
ARIN
Hi Owen,
I think that the comparison with a property is not good, so I'm top posting to
make it simple.
ARIN is providing a registration service for unique and exclusive rights for
resources, following a membership organization model.
Let's take another similar "association membership model".
Hi Owen,
I think my original message
(https://lists.arin.net/pipermail/arin-ppml/2019-April/032896.html) clearly
stated it, and despite the different wording used by different folks, everybody
is supporting the same petition, as there is only one right now in the list.
There is a further messa
support or nonsupport for the topic to
allow others to follow discussions of interest more easily and make your
position clear.
<<<<<
On Apr 29, 2019, at 2:28 PM, JORDI PALET MARTINEZ via ARIN-PPML
wrote:
Right, I was about to respond as well, but I think at this sta
Right, I was about to respond as well, but I think at this stage we should keep
the discussion on the petition.
All those details could be agreed once we have the proposal adopted for the
discussion. In fact, we have a new version ready (v2, being published in RIPE
soon) with have a lot of a
Hi Owen,
El 27/4/19 9:40, "Owen DeLong" escribió:
My text below is my own thoughts and not any official position from ARIN or the
AC...
On Apr 27, 2019, at 00:23 , JORDI PALET MARTINEZ
wrote:
Hi Owen,
El 27/4/19 9:00, "Owen DeLong" escribió:
Speaking only as a member of t
Hi Owen,
I will be interesting to have figures about this in all the RIRs. How many are
members, how many not, how many are clearly intentional vs fat fingers, etc.
Somebody already replied with an example of a member hijacking ... and this is
interesting, because you know the excuse I get ever
Hi Michael,
El 27/4/19 1:12, "Michael Sinatra" escribió:
On 2019-04-26 13:54, JORDI PALET MARTINEZ via ARIN-PPML wrote:
> Hi Owen,
>
> So, you believe that if an ARIN member is repeatedly misusing the
resources from another member, is just fine and the AR
ot;representative" system for the community).
I hope this is helpful information.
Owen
> On Apr 26, 2019, at 23:44 , JORDI PALET MARTINEZ via ARIN-PPML
wrote:
>
> Hi Michel,
>
> This proposal is being discussed already in RIPE a
Hi Michel,
This proposal is being discussed already in RIPE and LACNIC and we are working
in the relevant changes for versions to be submitted in AFRINIC and APNIC.
As I understand the petition process is not for the proposal merits, but just
to be able to follow the process with it, so it can
Hi Owen,
So, you believe that if an ARIN member is repeatedly misusing the resources
from another member, is just fine and the ARIN membership which rules are the
policies, should not care about this behavior and members should not get their
exclusive rights to use their allocated resources pro
Hi all,
The AC should have already accepted “ARIN-prop-266: BGP Hijacking is an ARIN
Policy Violation” as a Draft Policy.
The authors petition to move the proposal text forward for discussion on the
list and at the next Public Policy Meeting. Please support moving this proposal
forward now by
ansfers should
be limited to PI space and it should not be permitted in PA space since
that leads us down the road to much fragmented routing tables.
Albert Erdmann
Network Administrator
Paradise On Line Inc.
On Wed, 3 Apr 2019, JORDI PALET MARTINEZ via ARIN-PPML wr
I agree with Jay (or at least is my reading from the proposal), Job can
probably confirm.
It is true that my example is easier to explain for an M&A case but not only
that case is being covered by the proposal.
Regards,
Jordi
El 4/4/19 22:29, "ARIN-PPML en nombre de Jay Borkenhagen"
esc
that governments prefer to issue billion euros fines to
tech giants who are called BAADD by The Economist than to moralize those I call
GGM21C - the Great Global Mafia of the 21st Century.
Marilson
Em qua, 27 de mar de 2019 às 05:41, JORDI PALET MARTINEZ via ARIN-PPML
escreveu:
Hi Owen,
El 27/3/19 18:04, "Owen DeLong" escribió:
> On Mar 27, 2019, at 09:41 , JORDI PALET MARTINEZ via ARIN-PPML
wrote:
>
> Hi Owen,
>
> Just found a couple of examples that I was sure I've read recently.
>
>
I guess people that suffered big networks M&A or similar situations, know very
well, how terrible are this type of situations, and how they want to avoid at
all means renumbering.
We also need to remember that smaller networks have also equivalent problems,
they have less devices to renumber, b
Sorry the late answer been extremely busy for a few days and had big email
backlog.
El 27/3/19 23:12, "arin-ppml-boun...@arin.net en nombre de
hostmas...@uneedus.com" escribió:
On Tue, 26 Mar 2019, JORDI PALET MARTINEZ via ARIN-PPML wrote:
>
> El 26/3/19 2
Hi Guy, all,
Because I see my name here, I’m just guessing that your opinion is not about
this policy proposal (2018-5), as per the subject, but about ARIN-2019-4: Allow
Inter-regional IPv6 Resource Transfers ?
I think is important to clarify for the PDP decision process.
Regards,
Jord
se for
IPv6 in any RIR.
Owen
> On Mar 27, 2019, at 07:15 , JORDI PALET MARTINEZ via ARIN-PPML
wrote:
>
> In some RIRs, the policies only allow you to use the addresses (or most
of them), in that region.
>
> Regards,
> Jordi
>
In some RIRs, the policies only allow you to use the addresses (or most of
them), in that region.
Regards,
Jordi
El 27/3/19 13:38, "ARIN-PPML en nombre de Roberts, Orin"
escribió:
Opposed - the simple view.
Why is the need for an IPv6 "Inter-regional" policy justifiable?
Hi Marilson,
El 27/3/19 1:34, "ARIN-PPML en nombre de Marilson Mapa"
escribió:
If the current policy, “3.6. Annual Validation of ARIN’s Public Whois Point of
Contact Data” does not provide sufficient validation of the actual availability
of the abuse mailbox, a standard abuse-c/abuse-ma
ment as well?
Thanks.
On Tue, Mar 26, 2019 at 4:46 PM JORDI PALET MARTINEZ via ARIN-PPML
wrote:
In favor of the proposal.
My point of view is on the other way around.
This policy is needed, because if there is a company under an M&A or
reorganization, it seems clear that then it is
El 26/3/19 23:23, "arin-ppml-boun...@arin.net en nombre de
hostmas...@uneedus.com" escribió:
I am opposed.
IPv6 policies have been designed from the beginning to limit the growth of
the global routing tables. Policies such as sparse assignment help with
this goal, as wel
In favor of the proposal.
My point of view is on the other way around.
This policy is needed, because if there is a company under an M&A or
reorganization, it seems clear that then it is transferred IPv4, IPv6, ASN. But
there may be cases where is not entirely failing into that category.
For e
Exactly, that was one of the main reason for me to submit this proposal in all
the RIRs, no NOT, means that something that was often happening in IPv4, will
happen with every end-user assignment in IPv6, because most of them provide
some kind of access to employees, visitors, etc.
Regards,
Jord
Unless I’m missing anything (in other regions we have “sub-assignment”), I
think it works for me.
May be a way to shorten it is to use the proposed sentence, but after all the
definitions:
2.5. Allocation, Assignment, Reallocation, Reassignment
Allocation - Address space delegated
I should have waited a few extra minutes before replying ...
I'm ok with this new text wording.
Thanks!
Regards,
Jordi
-Mensaje original-
De: ARIN-PPML en nombre de ARIN
Fecha: lunes, 13 de agosto de 2018, 12:39
Para:
Asunto: [arin-ppml] Revised/Retitled - Draft
Hi all,
I believe the new wording is sufficiently clear. Thanks for that!
Regards,
Jordi
-Mensaje original-
De: ARIN-PPML en nombre de ARIN
Fecha: viernes, 10 de agosto de 2018, 13:48
Para:
Asunto: [arin-ppml] Revised - Draft Policy ARIN-2018-4: Clarification on IPv6
connected, then you leave.
This is temporary. Even if you’re there for several days (as in a hotel guest
network), it’s still temporary in nature.
Owen
On May 10, 2018, at 8:29 AM, JORDI PALET MARTINEZ via ARIN-PPML
wrote:
I don’t think that will help, on the contrary … you can
I don’t think that will help, on the contrary … you can use both static or
dynamic mechanism for both temporary and non-temporary assignments.
What I think it was clear is the differentiation between a “permanent broadband
service” and a temporary service (you come to your workplace and get
90 matches
Mail list logo
