Hello!
Any good solution should be start taking effect in the future rather
than retroactively, it should be fair and transparent,...
So I would like to propose two solutions to this dilemma:
a) All ipv4 resources received from the the waiting list requests
submitted after 2022-01-01 are non-transferable and bound to the LIR
that has requested the resource.
b) All ipv4 resources received from the the waiting list requests
submitted after 2022-01-01 are non-transferable for the next 60 months.
Suggestion (b) would bring us more in line with how ARIN handles
requests. Whereas #1 would favor small LIR's. Both solutions create
almost 0 additional strain on the current processes.
kind regards
Sebastian Graf
This has the advantage of being "fair"
On 12/7/21 18:31, Gert Doering wrote:
Hi,
On Tue, Dec 07, 2021 at 06:25:21PM +0100, denis walker wrote:
Many years ago I questioned why we ever invented a market for address
space 'that no one owns' when we had a perfectly good system of
allocating address space based on need and when no longer needed was
returned to the RIR to be re-allocated...for free. I was told 'don't
be silly, people will still sell the address space but not record the
transfers in the RIPE Database'. So the quality of the registry
diminishes. What is going to stop people selling these 'never to be
transferred' allocations and not recording the transfer in the RIPE
Database? I am sure some back door dealings can be arranged to keep
the LIRs active that have the allocations registered and obfuscate the
fee payments to confuse the RIPE NCC. Have companies developed some
sense of morality in recent years?
If the LIR fee is still to be paid, this is commercially not very
attractive - and as such, should stop the business model "open a LIR,
get a /24 for <x> EUR, sell it for <5*x>" nicely.
Note that we always acknowledged the need for a block of addresses
to "change hands", by mergers & acquisition. Having a formal transfer
policy was basically just accepting that people would hide this in
a company sale otherwise.
My proposal is actually to disallow transfers *including* disallowing
M&A transfers on these. It MUST stay in the LIR it was requested by,
and if the LIR closes, it MUST be returned.
Buying a "company with the LIR" would still be possible, of course
(and I do not see a way to disallow this, it's like MS trying to
disallow selling used windows licenses), but "... and then transferring,
and closing the LIR" would not.
Gert Doering
-- NetMaster
--
To unsubscribe from this mailing list, get a password reminder, or change your
subscription options, please visit:
https://lists.ripe.net/mailman/listinfo/address-policy-wg
