Hi Gert, You say it will not solve all other potential problems that exist or might exist and I agree with you here, but to me it cannot also solve the existing and known problem too.
"making less attractive" is not also a good argument to support it, Regards, Arash Naderpour -----Original Message----- From: Gert Doering [mailto:[email protected]] Sent: Tuesday, June 09, 2015 1:09 PM To: Arash Naderpour Cc: 'Gert Doering'; [email protected] Subject: Re: [address-policy-wg] 2015-01 Draft Document and Impact Analysis Published Hi, On Tue, Jun 09, 2015 at 07:21:49AM +0430, Arash Naderpour wrote: > "This policy proposal will not prevent organisations from setting up > one or more LIRs and hoarding the /22s. It will only add a two-year > restriction before a /22 from the last /8 can be transferred." It does what it intends to do, and that is, make fast-trading (open LIR, get /22, sell of, close LIR) less attractive. It will not solve all other potential problems that exist or might exist, so "it does not go far enough" is not a good argument to oppose what might achieved in this first step - of course, a second step can always follow. 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
