[address-policy-wg] Re: [policy-announce] 2007-08 Review Period extended until 9 July 2008 (Enabling Methods for Reallocation of IPv4 Resources)

Just being curious; Why exactly shouldn't the LIR on the receiving end
of a transfer have to document their need for addresses like everyone
else?

[... or maybe one has to make other policy-changes to compensate for
almost all current restrictions relying on the term "documented need".]

I can't find anything preventing anybody, as long as they're a
registered business, from registering as a LIR. Under current policies
that makes no sense as there are no resources to be had without
documented need. While torpedoing the allocation terms, the transfer
terms place does not place a limit on how many blocks can be acquired
either. With the suggested exception in force one could take a chance
on an inflating market, register a LIR today and start hoarding blocks
to be resold 2+years from now. This is clearly not the intention of the
proposal and should be easily detected, but it may not be as easy to
close such loopholes later.


I'd rather prefer the opposite. I.e. that the suggested §5.5 is changed
so that the receiving LIR must have their documented need for resources
acknowledged by the NCC _before_ a transfer can be initiated. 

//per