14 Apr
2016
14 Apr
'16
12:31 a.m.
On Thu, Apr 14, 2016 at 12:00:45AM +0200, denis wrote: Denis
Taking your arguments stated above, I once again (this time more clear) say that rolling back the change to allow changes to the PERSON object name would _not_ have fixed the problem.
Maybe not, but it would have been a harmless change. Your action has
This change has been discussed and expected in this community at least from the year 2000. And has been checked by You in 2014 with RIPE NCC's legal team. I haven't seen any technical, legal, procedural (nor any other) objections raised by You under issue 221 (https://github.com/RIPE-NCC/whois/issues/221). What has changed during last 1.5 year? Piotr -- gucio -> Piotr Strzyżewski E-mail: Piotr.Strzyzewski@polsl.pl