This archive is retained to ensure existing URLs remain functional. It will not contain any emails sent to this mailing list after July 1, 2024. For all messages, including those sent before and after this date, please visit the new location of the archive at https://mailman.ripe.net/archives/list/[email protected]/
[members-discuss] [comms] [ncc-announce] [news] RIPE NCC Members and Multiple
- Previous message (by thread): [members-discuss] [comms] [ncc-announce] [news] RIPE NCC Members and Multiple
- Next message (by thread): [members-discuss] [comms] [ncc-announce] [news] RIPE NCC Members and Multiple
Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
Matthias Šubik
matthias.subik at ucnd.at
Tue Feb 16 16:23:20 CET 2016
> On 16.02.2016, at 16:21, Nick Hilliard <nick at netability.ie> wrote: > > Misak Khachatryan wrote: >> Why not to have a some rule to forbid IPv4 transfer from last /8 RIPE >> block for 3 or even 5 years? This will prevent companies to register >> LIR just for selling addresses. >> >> This of course is very strict, but some restriction like this can help. > > this sort of thing won't help. Transfers will happen anyway. The only > thing that will happen as a result of attempting to ban transfers is > that the transfer will not be documented, which will drive the address > market underground. This benefits no-one. When you look at my idea posted earlier, like you I won’t interfere with the usage, just the bill is higher from a business perspective. Matthias
- Previous message (by thread): [members-discuss] [comms] [ncc-announce] [news] RIPE NCC Members and Multiple
- Next message (by thread): [members-discuss] [comms] [ncc-announce] [news] RIPE NCC Members and Multiple
Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]