[address-policy-wg] 2015-04 New Version and Impact Analysis Published (RIPE Resource Transfer Policies)

I totally agree with the AS number situation. When I worked for RCS&RDS we
acquired many companies and although we kept some AS numbers, it really
makes no sense in putting a 24 months lock on them.

Ciprian

On Wednesday, October 19, 2016, Plesa Niculae <niculae at plesa.ro> wrote:

> Dear colleagues,
>
> Regarding the [address-policy-wg] 2015-04 New Version and Impact Analysis
> Published (RIPE Resource Transfer Policies):
>
> The supposed purpose of the policy was to organise more efficiently, in a
> single document, the rules regarding transfer of resources but it brings a
> restriction which has not been properly analysed and debated. In my opinion
> there are many cases when two ISPs would merge. Due to the restructuring
> after the merger it is likely that the IPs could be used more efficiently
> and the resulting company would have spare resources that could be
> transferred like one of the AS numbers and maybe some IPs. If both
> companies have received the IPs and AS numbers many years ago, why should
> they not be able to transfer the resulting unused resources after the
> merger ? There is no logical point in that. Maybe there would not result
> some unused IPs but at least there is a 100% certainty that one of the AS
> numbers would become useless. This policy would force the company to keep
> it for 24 months just because they did a merger ? In today’s market it's
> quite common that smaller ISPs get acquired by larger ones and the policy
> would impose some restrictions which makes no sense.
>
> I have more observations regarding other non-sense and incorrect terms of
> the proposed policy, but first I really want to see if Marco, together with
> the RIPE team, really want to discuss and make modifications according the
> general good and common sense or everybody wants to pass this policy, like
> most of them, with no real answers to the problems raised. We will pass
> this policy in fanfare sounds, without any modifications, like the most of
> the past ones, or we will look seriously at members observations and change
> the policy accordingly?
>
> Best Regards
> Niculae Plesa
>
>
>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: </ripe/mail/archives/address-policy-wg/attachments/20161019/a91654c7/attachment.html>