But exactly the same can happen with sub-allocated address space. Why would transfers be any different? At least with a transfer you can show that the responsibility for those addresses was (temporarily) transferred to another organisation. With sub-allocated addresses the responsibility remains with
Dear Sander, the
original holder, who would then probably even have a bigger problem explaining everything and getting off the spam lists.
This seems to be an argument *in favour* of using temporary transfers...
It is very difficult discuss with black lists delisting. Some of black lists can ignore requests. It is better prevent blacklisting. If I understund well policy of transfers - minimal term of transfer - 2 years. It is too long too. I understund that it is normail for EU, but for Russia most of agreement usualy for 1 year. -- Kind regards, Alexey Ivanov LeaderTelecom B.V. Team URL: [1]http://www.LeaderTelecom.nl/ - IP- addresses URL: [2]http://www.GetWildcard.com/nl - WildCard SSL certificates 14.10.2012 16:23 - Sander Steffann написал(а): Hi,
Permanenent transfer cost [...]
Please remember that the current transfer policy explicitly states "This re-allocation may be on either a permanent or non-permanent basis." so you can already use the current transfer policy for temporary transfers.
After temporary transfer you can receive back IPs which listed in Spamhouse. I don't know any company which will temporary transfers IPs.
But exactly the same can happen with sub-allocated address space. Why would transfers be any different? At least with a transfer you can show that the responsibility for those addresses was (temporarily) transferred to another organisation. With sub-allocated addresses the responsibility remains with the original holder, who would then probably even have a bigger problem explaining everything and getting off the spam lists. This seems to be an argument *in favour* of using temporary transfers... Sander [1] http://www.leadertelecom.nl/ [2] http://www.GetWildcard.com/nl