[address-policy-wg] 2013-03 New Policy Proposal (No Need - Post-Depletion Reality Adjustment and Cleanup)

Hi,

On Sun, Mar 24, 2013 at 12:32:32PM -0400, McTim wrote:
> On Sun, Mar 24, 2013 at 12:27 PM, Gert Doering <gert at space.net> wrote:
> > (ERX space handed out before the existance of the RIRs and then transferred
> > to the RIPE NCC as part of documentation cleanup does *not* fall under
> > RIPE address policy)
> 
> If this is the case, then why does
> https://www.ripe.net/ripe/policies/proposals/2012-02 say:
> 
> 
> "Any LIR is allowed to re-allocate complete or partial blocks of IPv4
> address space that were previously allocated to them by either the
> RIPE NCC or the IANA."
> 
> ?

Well, to be precise, that's not something 2012-02 adds, but is in the
policy text since transfers have been added.  (2012-02 rephrases the
first sentence of the second paragraph of 5.5, which this is not)

I can only speculate on the original author's motives, but I think 
it's not wrong to *permit* something which might become relevant
eventually, should an ERX holder decide to bring their address space
"under the umbrella of the RIPE NCC", however the specifics might
look like, 10 years later... (ncc-services is working on a proposal
for interaction between the early address holders and the RIPE NCC).

Gert Doering
        -- APWG chair
-- 
have you enabled IPv6 on something today...?

SpaceNet AG                        Vorstand: Sebastian v. Bomhard
Joseph-Dollinger-Bogen 14          Aufsichtsratsvors.: A. Grundner-Culemann
D-80807 Muenchen                   HRB: 136055 (AG Muenchen)
Tel: +49 (89) 32356-444            USt-IdNr.: DE813185279
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 306 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: </ripe/mail/archives/address-policy-wg/attachments/20130324/fdb2af7d/attachment.sig>