Am I wrong, but the /22 for the existing companies is still subject to "need analysis"? Sort to say - if you have enough IPs in your existing netblock you are not eligible to get this add-ons? Then why the LIR should transfer the IPs if in the process of getting them it shows the need? RIPE NCC is for distributing addresses - it's OK - but for USAGE, not for SELLING.
Second consideration is about supposed limitation in distribution of the IP addresses. Am I wrong again, but initially LIR is not the same as ISP? Yes, I agree that often it is the same company, but if an ISP is so badly in need of IPs it can buy SERVICE from a external LIR (the LIR will allow to use a block of its IP addresses). Transfers are not the only way of helping an ISP with addresses. Regards, Vladislav Potapov -----Original Message----- From: address-policy-wg [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of Arash Naderpour Sent: Wednesday, July 1, 2015 3:21 AM To: [email protected] Subject: [address-policy-wg] Opposing policy 2015-01 Hi, I oppose policy 2015-01 because it can affect LIRs which are not new but they recently have received their /22 from last /8. (For example an LIR which is registered in 2010 and just received its /22) the LIR is not established to just receive the /22 but it has to wait for 2 years to be able to transfer it and I don't see any reason for this limitation. As a side effect it makes it harder for IP distribution which is the main goal of RIPE. Regards, Arash Naderpour
