[members-discuss] [ncc-announce] [news] RIPE NCC Members and Multiple LIR Accounts - Please Discuss

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA256



On 11/02/2016 16:41, Johan Hedberg wrote:
> In my opinion that’s a bad idea. For example, LIR A buys another
> company which happens to be a LIR. (For other reasons than the IP
> resources) Then they shouldn’t need to pay a bunch of IP’s that may
> very well be in active use, just to transfer the resources from LIR B
> to LIR A.

Well there is quite a difference between this situation and the case
or a speculative reseller.

When a speculative reseller sells a subnet, this block is empty and
there is no assignments nor used IPs on it.

When company A buys company B with its activity (or part of it), there
is an operational network on it.

So authorizing "in use" blocks to be transferred looks OK. Despite
simulating this is possible, it seems uneasy because in case of mergers
and acquisitions the AS origins can be related, there should be quite a
logical and proper history of assignments documented in the Whois, and
the assignments will not move a lot immediately even in the cas of some
reoganization in the transferred infrastructure, so simulating this is 
quite a complicated work.

On the other hand, transfers of empty blocks are obviously either a
matter of speculation, or of growing IPv4 business. So this could be
more closely examined, especially of the sold block comes from a 
recent /22 allocation.

Best regards,
Sylvain

- -- 
http://www.opdop.fr  -  mutualiser et interconnecter en coopérative
Opdop - Société Coopérative d'Interêt Collectif sous forme de SARL
sur IRC réseau geeknode #opdop - tél: 0950 31 54 74, 06 86 38 38 68
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1

iF4EAREIAAYFAlbF41gACgkQJBGsD8mtnRFHYwEAxIDdZhMckGwfFGzy4EDVzwmP
qrdBmIua3+yKzoc/fwAA/i7VptISBLm0p9pvihfKmbPQaecFCF6ks72wgtigKeXC
=Zxp7
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----