I didn't said anything about retroactivity: - Holders of legacy that don't transfer them, aren't affected. - Transfers already done (from legacy resources) aren't affected
The only affected ones are "new" transfers (if the policy reach consensus), and is only affecting the ones that get the resources, not the original holder. Again, please consider, if it is good that we are the only RIR not doing so. I don't think that's good. Regards, Jordi @jordipalet El 15/7/19 14:17, "address-policy-wg en nombre de Havard Eidnes via address-policy-wg" <[email protected] en nombre de [email protected]> escribió: >> It might be self-evident to you how this is problematic. It >> is not to me. > > Because I think when there is an unfair situation (some folks > bound to rules/policies, others not), there is a problem. You cannot change history, and the fact that some assignments were made under different rules and prior to the RIRs coming into existence. Retroactively and forecfully from the RIR side changing the rules for these assignments, *that* would be unfair. Regards, - Håvard ********************************************** IPv4 is over Are you ready for the new Internet ? http://www.theipv6company.com The IPv6 Company This electronic message contains information which may be privileged or confidential. The information is intended to be for the exclusive use of the individual(s) named above and further non-explicilty authorized disclosure, copying, distribution or use of the contents of this information, even if partially, including attached files, is strictly prohibited and will be considered a criminal offense. If you are not the intended recipient be aware that any disclosure, copying, distribution or use of the contents of this information, even if partially, including attached files, is strictly prohibited, will be considered a criminal offense, so you must reply to the original sender to inform about this communication and delete it.
