Agree with AS numbers. There should not be any limit. Yuri
On 19.10.2016 13:36, Ciprian Nica wrote: > I totally agree with the AS number situation. When I worked for RCS&RDS > we acquired many companies and although we kept some AS numbers, it > really makes no sense in putting a 24 months lock on them. > > Ciprian > > On Wednesday, October 19, 2016, Plesa Niculae <[email protected] > <mailto:[email protected]>> wrote: > > Dear colleagues, > > Regarding the [address-policy-wg] 2015-04 New Version and Impact > Analysis Published (RIPE Resource Transfer Policies): > > The supposed purpose of the policy was to organise more efficiently, > in a single document, the rules regarding transfer of resources but > it brings a restriction which has not been properly analysed and > debated. In my opinion there are many cases when two ISPs would > merge. Due to the restructuring after the merger it is likely that > the IPs could be used more efficiently and the resulting company > would have spare resources that could be transferred like one of the > AS numbers and maybe some IPs. If both companies have received the > IPs and AS numbers many years ago, why should they not be able to > transfer the resulting unused resources after the merger ? There is > no logical point in that. Maybe there would not result some unused > IPs but at least there is a 100% certainty that one of the AS > numbers would become useless. This policy would force the company to > keep it for 24 months just because they did a merger ? In today’s > market it's quite common that smaller ISPs get acquired by larger > ones and the policy would impose some restrictions which makes no sense. > > I have more observations regarding other non-sense and incorrect > terms of the proposed policy, but first I really want to see if > Marco, together with the RIPE team, really want to discuss and make > modifications according the general good and common sense or > everybody wants to pass this policy, like most of them, with no real > answers to the problems raised. We will pass this policy in fanfare > sounds, without any modifications, like the most of the past ones, > or we will look seriously at members observations and change the > policy accordingly? > > Best Regards > Niculae Plesa > > >
