[address-policy-wg] 2015-04 New Draft Documents and Impact Analysis Published (RIPE Resource Transfer Policies)
- Previous message (by thread): [address-policy-wg] 2015-04 New Draft Documents and Impact Analysis Published (RIPE Resource Transfer Policies)
- Next message (by thread): [address-policy-wg] 2015-04 New Draft Documents and Impact Analysis Published (RIPE Resource Transfer Policies)
Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
Erik Bais - A2B Internet
ebais at a2b-internet.com
Sat Feb 6 20:55:45 CET 2016
Hi Sascha, The policy proposal states : > 2.2 Transfer Restrictions > Scarce resources, which are understood as those resources that are allocated or assigned >by the RIPE NCC on a restricted basis (such as IPv4 or 16-bit ASNs), cannot be >transferred for 24 months from the date the resource was received by the resource holder. >This restriction also applies if the resource was received due to a change in the >organisation’s business (such as a merger or acquisition). Point 2.2 already states what is to be understood by scares resources. All RIPE NCC issued IPv4 and 16bit ASNs. That means indeed as the IA states : PI IPv4 and IPv4 PA space and 16 bit ASNs .. Is there something missing ? Regards, Erik Bais > Op 6 feb. 2016 om 19:57 heeft Sascha Luck [ml] <apwg at c4inet.net> het volgende geschreven: > >> On Sat, Feb 06, 2016 at 02:54:33PM +0100, Tore Anderson wrote: >> [x] yes, this makes sense, go there > > +1 However: I'd like to see a paragraph defining which resources are > "scarce resources" That way, it is immediately clear which > resources are covered by hold times etc, and more importantly > there is a formal process by which a resource is declared "scarce" > (through the PDP). The impact statement currently states: > > "The RIPE NCC understands "scarce resources" to include IPv4 PA, > IPv4 PI and 16-bit AS Numbers. If the community declares other > resources to be scarce, the list of resources for which the > holding period will apply will be adjusted accordingly." > > This needs to be part of the policy to avoid doubt and increase > clarity to both NCC personnel and resource holders. > >> Remco suggested adding references to the new policy document in >> lieu of the removed sections in ripe-638, ripe-649, and >> ripe-655. I would not object to that. > > Sensible addition. > rgds, > Sascha Luck > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: <https://lists.ripe.net/ripe/mail/archives/address-policy-wg/attachments/20160206/d526709f/attachment.html>
- Previous message (by thread): [address-policy-wg] 2015-04 New Draft Documents and Impact Analysis Published (RIPE Resource Transfer Policies)
- Next message (by thread): [address-policy-wg] 2015-04 New Draft Documents and Impact Analysis Published (RIPE Resource Transfer Policies)
Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]