[address-policy-wg] 2016-03 Discussion Period extended until 15 July 2016 (Locking Down the Final /8 Policy)

hi,

On Fri, Jun 17, 2016 at 10:49:59PM +0200, Riccardo Gori wrote:
> I am strongly against to every proposal that higher the disvlaantage to 
> already disvantaged new and future pyers (LIRs after 09/2012)

This proposal actually will only disadvantage "young LIRs" if they want
to do stuff with their /22 that is frowned upon by the community - namely,
trade, instead of "use for customers".

The *reason* why this is proposed is to discourage stockpiling of /22s
(by opening many new LIRs, waiting two years, transfer it all into a
joint LIR and close the others off) - taking away /22s that are supposed
to be used by further new entrants into the market.

A LIR that receives space, runs a network, addresses its customers, and
might even be potentially bought one day is *not* affected (unlike 
version 1 of the proposal) - though the proposal might be clearer on the
intended effects of M&A.

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 (0)89/32356-444           USt-IdNr.: DE813185279
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 819 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: </ripe/mail/archives/address-policy-wg/attachments/20160618/cdced172/attachment.sig>