Gert and all, Judging requests is not necessarily a bad thing, but doing so can quickly become a very bad thing unless there is a set of procedures and/or policies that are enforceable and will dictate the limitations and specifics of such judgments. Gert Doering wrote:
Hi,
On Fri, Jan 09, 2004 at 12:15:20PM +0100, Sascha Lenz wrote:
==> I'd prefer more open "Criteria". We have no real IPv4 shortage, i don't see why we need to restrict this that much once again. RIPE hostmasters should be able to recognize a "good reason", even if there's no keyword in it they can check against a certain policy.
It's not that easy. *If* they start "judging" requests, they also start asking lots of additional questions (to understand the background), and then people will again start complaining "the hostmasters are so annoying with all these questions! why do I need to send in an IPv6 network diagram, I just want addresses!"...
This is why I'm aiming for a very specific "checklist". No doubts, no discussions.
Gert Doering -- NetMaster -- Total number of prefixes smaller than registry allocations: 57882 (57753)
SpaceNet AG Mail: netmaster@Space.Net Joseph-Dollinger-Bogen 14 Tel : +49-89-32356-0 80807 Muenchen Fax : +49-89-32356-299
Regards, -- Jeffrey A. Williams Spokesman for INEGroup LLA. - (Over 134k members/stakeholders strong!) "Be precise in the use of words and expect precision from others" - Pierre Abelard "If the probability be called P; the injury, L; and the burden, B; liability depends upon whether B is less than L multiplied by P: i.e., whether B is less than PL." United States v. Carroll Towing (159 F.2d 169 [2d Cir. 1947] =============================================================== CEO/DIR. Internet Network Eng. SR. Eng. Network data security Information Network Eng. Group. INEG. INC. E-Mail jwkckid1@ix.netcom.com Contact Number: 214-244-4827 or 214-244-3801