Dears,
as mentioned during the policy session, I am opposing to this (version
of) the policy proposal.
While I was sure that I did voice this concern over the mailing list, I
can not find the e-mail now. But I am sure I did voice this concern and
the opposition at previous RIPE Meeting(s).
As long as this proposal adds the 2 years holding period of scarce
resources moved through M&As (which are 'regulated' through a RIPE NCC
procedure) I will oppose to it.
I am not going to go into examples wars of why some company would want
to transfer/move/merge/etc.. resources within a 2 years period. While I
agree that transfers should have a holding (or call it anti-flip) period
and I even proposed 2015-01 (which is now part of policy), I do not
agree that we should include M&As in the same bucket.
If a new version of this policy proposal would be only about transfers
of IP addresses, and not try to sneak in M&As into the same document, I
would agree with it.
my 2 cents,
elvis
On 5/25/16 9:52 AM, Remco van Mook wrote:
Dear all,
as just mentioned during the address policy session, I'm withdrawing my
objection to 2015-04. While I do think a discussion about policy structure
still needs to be held, I don't think it should hold up this proposal any
longer. This can be fixed after adoption - as long as we're aware.
I do maintain my suggestion to put references in place where chapters about
transfers are removed from other sections of policy.
Kind regards,
Remco
--
<http://v4escrow.net>
Elvis Daniel Velea
Chief Executive Officer
E-mail: [email protected] <mailto:[email protected]>
Mobile: +1 (702) 970 0921
Recognised IPv4 Broker/Facilitator in:
