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

On Sat, Jun 18, 2016 at 3:46 PM, Arash Naderpour <arash_mpc at parsun.com>
wrote:

>
> >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".
>
> That's not true, it can affect any holder of /22 from 185/8


Can you please stop writing that? It is not about 185/8. It's about all
allocations made after a certain point in time.


> not only "young
> LIRs".
> Even if it was limited to "young LIRs" it was not acceptable to me as they
> need to be treated same as "old LIRs", These who become a member earlier
> already have enough advantage over the newer ones, and this policy grant
> them more and I cannot agree with that.
>

I really cannot see how that is true. The policy proposal provides new LIRs
with better protection from "shark" LIRs who don't want to run businesses
with their allocated space.

The proposal is all about protecting new LIRs who actually will do
assignments with their allocated space.

I do agree, though, with the repeated criticism about how M&A is handled.
-- 
Jan
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: </ripe/mail/archives/address-policy-wg/attachments/20160618/6137713b/attachment.html>