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]/
[address-policy-wg] 2012-02 New Draft Document and Impact Analysis Published (Policy for Inter-RIR Transfers of IPv4 Address Space)
- Previous message (by thread): [address-policy-wg] 2012-02 New Draft Document and Impact Analysis Published (Policy for Inter-RIR Transfers of IPv4 Address Space)
- Next message (by thread): [address-policy-wg] 2012-02 New Draft Document and Impact Analysis Published (Policy for Inter-RIR Transfers of IPv4 Address Space)
Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
Sander Steffann
sander at steffann.nl
Wed Mar 13 12:26:40 CET 2013
Hi, >>> "Such address space must not contain any block that is assigned to an >>> End User" >> Well, that's the "original" transfer policy - which compromised on >> "ok, we'll permit transfers, but only transfers of empty PA blocks!" > > what if the buyer has contracted to support the sub-allocation? The transfer policy explicitly says 'empty PA'. But in the case you describe it might be possible to do this through the mergers/acquisitions procedures because the buyer isn't buying address space but acquiring a part of a business. The NCC will probably look at such things case-by-case. And I might be wrong :-) Sander
- Previous message (by thread): [address-policy-wg] 2012-02 New Draft Document and Impact Analysis Published (Policy for Inter-RIR Transfers of IPv4 Address Space)
- Next message (by thread): [address-policy-wg] 2012-02 New Draft Document and Impact Analysis Published (Policy for Inter-RIR Transfers of IPv4 Address Space)
Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]