nanog mailing list archives
RE: Standard of Promptness
From: Tim Wilde <twilde () dyndns org>
Date: Mon, 17 Jan 2005 23:41:17 -0500 (EST)
On Mon, 17 Jan 2005, David Schwartz wrote:
You would have to. Otherwise, two quick transfers would defeat the scheme.
An alternative approach would be to prohibit a transfer within one week of
another transfer.
The new (read: current, now) ICANN transfer policy does this. Transfers cannot occur within 60 days of another transfer. I belive this portion of the policy was put in specifically for this reason.
Tim Wilde -- Tim Wilde twilde () dyndns org Systems Administrator Dynamic Network Services, Inc. http://www.dyndns.org/
Current thread:
- Re: The entire mechanism is Wrong!, (continued)
- Re: The entire mechanism is Wrong! Steven J. Sobol (Jan 16)
- Re: The entire mechanism is Wrong! Paul G (Jan 16)
- Re: The entire mechanism is Wrong! Steve Sobol (Jan 19)
- Re: The entire mechanism is Wrong! Alexei Roudnev (Jan 16)
- Re: The entire mechanism is Wrong! Christopher L. Morrow (Jan 16)
- Re: The entire mechanism is Wrong! Richard Cox (Jan 17)
- Standard of Promptness William Allen Simpson (Jan 17)
- Re: Standard of Promptness Eric Brunner-Williams in Portland Maine (Jan 18)
- Re: Standard of Promptness John Curran (Jan 18)
- RE: Standard of Promptness David Schwartz (Jan 18)
- RE: Standard of Promptness Tim Wilde (Jan 18)