OK. Let's it's welcome side effect. Please answer me the following question:
What reasoning (not purpose) has current proposal? 23.04.2015, 15:57, "Gert Doering" <[email protected]>: > Hi, > > On Thu, Apr 23, 2015 at 03:45:56PM +0300, Vladimir Andreev wrote: >>> On application for IPv4 resources LIRs will receive IPv4 addresses >>> according to the following: >>> >>> The size of the allocation made will be exactly one /22. >>> >>> The sum of all allocations made to a single LIR by the RIPE NCC after the >>> 14th of September 2012 is limited to a maximum of 1024 IPv4 addresses (a >>> single /22 or the equivalent thereof). >>> >>> The LIR must confirm it will make assignment(s) from the allocation. >> Please point me where in quoted text you see any prohibition to open and >> merge LIRs with /22's? > > It is not prohibited, and we're not trying to achieve that - prohibiting > is easy, enabling useful processes while discouraging abuse is the > tricky part. > > The spirit of this policy should be very clear to everybody, and we're > working on encouraging compliance with the spirit, not finding loopholes > in the letters. > > In other words: we don't really care if your business model suffers if > you can't fast-trade /22s anymore - it would be a welcome side effect. > > Gert Doering > -- APWG chair > -- > have you enabled IPv6 on something today...? > > SpaceNet AG Vorstand: Sebastian v. Bomhard > Joseph-Dollinger-Bogen 14 Aufsichtsratsvors.: A. Grundner-Culemann > D-80807 Muenchen HRB: 136055 (AG Muenchen) > Tel: +49 (0)89/32356-444 USt-IdNr.: DE813185279 -- With best regards, Vladimir Andreev General director, QuickSoft LLC Tel: +7 903 1750503
