Ah, right, yes, there was no actual policy proposal following that presentation and when thinking in RIPE terms proposal has a very particular term, hence the confusion. A lot of work has been done on this by the NCC, did you get a chance to read the NCC document on closure and deregistration procedure as presented at RIPE 61 in Rome (see http://www.ripe.net/legal/Closure-of-LIR-and-deregistration-of-INRs_final-dr...). I linked that a couple of days ago, but it's worth repeating. Brian. "Suresh Ramasubramanian" wrote the following on 03/02/2011 14:33:
As for Uwe I was thinking of the proposals he submitted at ripe 59. I'll ping him for a followup
H. Recovering resources assigned to non-existing entities http://www.ripe.net/ripe/meetings/ripe-59/presentations/rasmussen-recovering... Uwe Manuel Rasmussen, Microsoft
On Thu, Feb 3, 2011 at 3:26 PM, Brian Nisbet<brian.nisbet@heanet.ie> wrote:
First off, the proposals. Suresh, I'm not sure which proposal from Uwe you're talking about, sorry, but Tobias& Piotr's proposals, or at least the addressing of the issues they identified are progressing. Tobias has been in discussion with the NCC DB group and the other proposals are, well, proposed to be dealt with by the task force.