Hi Sander,

I was referring to inter-RIR transfers, sorry not having been more explicit.

I understand that the previous policies were only intra-RIR. The actual ones 
are both intra and inter.

I don't think it is a matter of respect previous rights, because in that case, 
when we do *any* policy change, we may be not respecting the "previous rights" 
(conceded by the previous policy), of some members.

The PDP is about the good of the overall community even if some times, some 
decisions aren't the best for the 100%.

Regards,
Jordi
@jordipalet
 
 

El 15/7/19 0:50, "Sander Steffann" <[email protected]> escribió:

    Hi Jordi.
    
    > I know about ripe-639.
    > 
    > What I’m saying is that we force the change of status from non-legacy to 
legacy if addresses are transferred to a new member or an existing member, as 
both of them will have all the legal bindings already with RIPE NCC.
    
    A legal entity can have zero, one or more LIRs. You are saying that we can 
abuse the contract that we have with those with one or more LIRs to force them 
into a position that we don't apply to those with zero LIRs? Also: when I have 
multiple LIRs, which LIR should get the legacy resources? And if I can choose 
which LIR, then I choose "none".
    
    > 639 was defined a couple of years before the transfers policy. It may be 
perfectly possible that at that time it was not considered this aspect.
    
    This is incorrect. We have had transfers since RIPE-441 from December 2008. 
The choices around transfers were very consciously made.
    
    > I know that every region is different, but we live in a global Internet, 
and it is surprising to me that we are the only out of 5 RIRs, that has not 
done this already.
    
    RIPE has respect for the rights of the people who came before it :)
    Sander
    
    



**********************************************
IPv4 is over
Are you ready for the new Internet ?
http://www.theipv6company.com
The IPv6 Company

This electronic message contains information which may be privileged or 
confidential. The information is intended to be for the exclusive use of the 
individual(s) named above and further non-explicilty authorized disclosure, 
copying, distribution or use of the contents of this information, even if 
partially, including attached files, is strictly prohibited and will be 
considered a criminal offense. If you are not the intended recipient be aware 
that any disclosure, copying, distribution or use of the contents of this 
information, even if partially, including attached files, is strictly 
prohibited, will be considered a criminal offense, so you must reply to the 
original sender to inform about this communication and delete it.





Reply via email to