On Wed, Sep 02, 2015 at 12:37:22AM +0200, Erik Bais wrote:
To clarify here ... although all types of number resources can
be transferred.. ( AS, IPv4, IPv6 ) there are some specific
resources ( like v4 for IXP usage ) are not allowed to be
transferred and MUST be returned..
https://www.ripe.net/publications/docs/ripe-649#61
So in itself it is a more specific statement in the intent of
the policy, this new policy isn't going to change the transfer
options if the current policy states that it must be returned..
OK, didn't actually know this restriction existed.
I also addressed this in the email of James. And it was also
discussed during the AS transfer policy in the room at the
AP-WG. The transfer policy time restriction is for scarce
resources .. ( like IPv4 and 16-bits ASN's.) and not for IPv6 or
32-bit ASn's.
A holding period for ASN16 is a material change in assignment
policy and should be in a separate proposal, not hidden in a (in
itself valuable) transfer policy aggregation proposal.
Btw.. did you see that nr. 4.0 will also implement if a new
field in the transfer statistics ...
- Whether it was a transfer or merger/acquisition
As it will also make a slight change in the transfer
restrictions .. as it closes the 'loophole' to have transfers
now also restricted after M&A's and not only after allocation by
RIPE NCC or transfers.
What is this supposed to mean? The 24-month timer resets if a
resource is acquired by M&A?
Pretty substantial change IMO. Again, this should be subject to a
separate proposal. And perhaps a membership vote as it
materially affects the M&A procedure.
People, the RIPE community should not make policy like the US
House of Representatives - by this I mean hiding your wish list
in marginally related legislation in the hope that it will go
unnoticed.
This proposal is a much needed aggregation of scattered policy
items and a laudable effort by the author.
It is ill served by trying to make changes to policy at the same
time.
As a result, I will oppose 2015-04 until I am satisfied that
there is no material change in policy contained within, and am
looking forward to discuss such changes on their own merits.
rgds,
Sascha Luck
