[address-policy-wg] 2015-04 New Policy Proposal (RIPE Resource Transfer Policies)

* Nick Hilliard

> first of all, a large thank-you for handling this policy aggregation.  This
> will make things a lot easier for organisations to understand how RIPE
> transfer policy works.  Although policy reworking like this is completely
> thankless, it's important to do.

Hear hear.

> all policies: removed statement about publishing stats on non-approved
> transfers.  Whoa, what's going on here?  Not ok.

I might be to blame for this one. Let me elaborate:

2012-05, which introduced this requirement, said the following:

«Recording when address transfers were denied on the basis of needs
evaluation (without identifying the block or the proposed recipient) is
also important, because it facilitates greater awareness of the impact
of RIPE NCC’s application of needs assessment policies on the transfer
market.»

However, needs assessment for IPv4 transfers (which was the only type
allowed at the time) was removed by 2013-03. Thus I considered the
requirement to be defunct policy as the NCC no longer would have any
reason to not approve of transfers, but I didn't get around to remove it
as part of 2013-03. That has irked me since, so I suggested to Erik
that maybe he could clean it away in his transfer unification proposal
instead.

That said, I now realise that since 2014-12 and 2014-13 passed there
might again be requests for IPv6/ASN transfers that the NCC might not
approve of, making 2015-04's removal of the publishing requirement an
actual change to effective policy. In light of that I suppose my
suggestion might have been a bad one. My apologies, Erik.

Tore