[address-policy-wg] 2015-01 Draft Document and Impact Analysis Published (Alignment of Transfer Requirements for IPv4 Allocations)
- Previous message (by thread): [address-policy-wg] 2015-01 Draft Document and Impact Analysis Published (Alignment of Transfer Requirements for IPv4 Allocations)
- Next message (by thread): [address-policy-wg] 2015-01 Draft Document and Impact Analysis Published (Alignment of Transfer Requirements for IPv4 Allocations)
Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
Radu-Adrian FEURDEAN
ripe-wgs at radu-adrian.feurdean.net
Mon May 11 18:42:23 CEST 2015
On Mon, May 11, 2015, at 18:06, Marco Schmidt wrote: > The proposal would apply to allocations that were made in the past. When > the RIPE NCC received a transfer request, we would check to see that at > least 24 months had elapsed since the allocation was made. For example, > a /22 allocation that was made 23 months before the proposal was > accepted would have a waiting period of one month before it could be > transferred. > > Regarding your other question, the proposal being discussed doesn't > apply to mergers or acquisitions. The Executive Board resolution > mentioned in the impact analysis is separate to the proposal and *does* > affect transfers, mergers, acquisitions and closures, and simply > requires that the full 12 month membership fee must be paid before a new > LIR can do any of these things. This way it's fine for mee too. +1
- Previous message (by thread): [address-policy-wg] 2015-01 Draft Document and Impact Analysis Published (Alignment of Transfer Requirements for IPv4 Allocations)
- Next message (by thread): [address-policy-wg] 2015-01 Draft Document and Impact Analysis Published (Alignment of Transfer Requirements for IPv4 Allocations)
Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]