Hi, ok, this has been going on for quite a while, and I'm not sure if anyone else is following. Filiz, if I could ask you one thing: is the only reason why you're opposing 2013-03 this particular wording: On Sat, Sep 21, 2013 at 06:56:24PM +0200, Filiz Yilmaz wrote:
Accordingly, I think following will be a more appropriate wording:
3. LIR must demonstrate its need for the IPv4 address space and must confirm it will make assignment(s) from the allocation.
replacing what you proposed: 3. The LIR must confirm it will make assignment(s) from the allocation
That is, if that particular sentence were changed in this specific way, you would support the policy change? As it has been a long discussion with *long* mails going back and forth, I'm fairly sure most readers have lost track what it's about, and who missed what deadline for which reason - but it would be very helpful to have a crystal clear statement here. It helps Sander and me to decide how to go forward at the end of the review phase, and it helps people that want to evaluate whether the PDP has been followed properly (as in: the WG chairs collective). thanks, Gert Doering -- APWG chair -- have you enabled IPv6 on something today...? SpaceNet AG Vorstand: Sebastian v. Bomhard Joseph-Dollinger-Bogen 14 Aufsichtsratsvors.: A. Grundner-Culemann D-80807 Muenchen HRB: 136055 (AG Muenchen) Tel: +49 (0)89/32356-444 USt-IdNr.: DE813185279