[address-policy-wg] Policy violation
- Previous message (by thread): [address-policy-wg] Policy violation
- Next message (by thread): [address-policy-wg] Policy violation
Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
Sander Steffann
sander at steffann.nl
Sat Dec 15 01:48:08 CET 2018
Hi Aleksey, > On the 7th of September the NCC implemeted the document https://www.ripe.net/publications/docs/ripe-709#transfer35 (The document is published on the 21th of September). The support clarify it that you cannot merge one LIR into the second LIR in case of M&A procedure because of the 24 month resource transfer restriction. That section doesn't seem to be about M&A. It talks about normal transfers between LIRs that belong to the same member. > However there is another document https://www.ripe.net/publications/docs/ripe-682#2-2-transfer… > where you can read the next: > > 2.2 Transfer Restrictions > This restriction does not prevent the resources from being transferred due to further mergers or acquisitions within the 24-month period. M&A is a different thing. It involves changes in legal business structures. Take a look at https://www.ripe.net/publications/docs/ripe-709#transfer31 item ii: """ If the transfer is taking place due to a change in the structure of the organisation(s) involved (e.g., merger, acquisition), a description of the changes among these organisation(s) is necessary. This description must be accompanied by the official legal documents issued by the relevant national authorities proving/supporting the changes the request is based on. If the change in the structure of the organisation(s) involved cannot be proven/supported by official documentation from national authorities describing this change (e.g., a network acquisition from one member to another), then these cases will fall within the scope of RIPE Policy "RIPE Resource Transfer Policies". """ If it is not M&A then the normal policies apply, even when transferring between LIRs belonging to the same member. That includes the 24 month waiting period. > In this case the NCC doesn't follow own policies. Or am I wrong? As far as I can see the NCC is following the policy. Cheers, Sander
- Previous message (by thread): [address-policy-wg] Policy violation
- Next message (by thread): [address-policy-wg] Policy violation
Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]