[address-policy-wg] 2014-07, was [Re: 2014-08 New Policy Proposal (Language Clarification in "Contractual Requirements for Provider Independent Resource Holders in the RIPE NCC Service Region")]

On Thu, Oct 23, 2014 at 10:30:27PM +0100, Nick Hilliard wrote:

You may have misunderstood this one. The change from "should" to "must" refers explicitly to the 6 points which need to be included in all end-user contracts, namely:

thanks, Nick, my mistake, indeed. 2014-08 seemed OK (except for the misapplication of RFC 2119). The comments were in response to 2014-07, "Language Clarification in "IPv4 Address Allocation and Assignment Policies for the RIPE NCC Service Region" -Peter