[address-policy-wg] 2016-03 New Version and Impact Analysis Published (Locking Down the Final /8 Policy)

Greetings!

Also -1.

I think the current policy that prevents transfers for 24 months is more
then enough.

There no need to change anything and make live more complex, hard and worse.

We already have problems with merges when ripe start to request registry
updates and that makes merges between international companies impossible
in real.

For last 1-2 years while we discuss limitations for new LIRs there was
too much talks that all will crash if we don't accept new polices. But
you can see by LIR registration stats that those changes doesn't affect
stats at all.

LIRs can get IPs. RIPE has more then enough IPs.
Let's better work on IPv6.

People don't need any locking and new statuses in inetnum-s.


Yuri.


On 19.10.2016 12:19, Patrick Velder wrote:
> Hi
> 
> I still disagree changing the status of already allocated resources.
> 
> -1 from me.
> 
> Regards
> Patrick
> 
> 
> On 19.10.2016 10:05, Marco Schmidt wrote:
>> Dear colleagues,
>>
>> The draft documents for version 3.0 of the policy proposal 2016-03,
>> "Locking Down the Final /8 Policy" have now been published, along with
>> an impact analysis conducted by the RIPE NCC.
>>
>> The goal of this proposal is to ban transfers of allocations made
>> under the final /8 policy. Also the proposal specifies what resources
>> must be added to the RIPE NCC IPv4 available pool.
>>
>> Some of the differences from version 2.0 include:
>>
>> -    Clarification that changes to holdership of address space as a
>> result of company mergers or acquisitions are not affected by proposed
>> transfer restriction
>> -    Legacy space handed over to the RIPE NCC will be added to the
>> IPv4 available pool
>>
>> You can find the full proposal and the impact analysis at:
>> https://www.ripe.net/participate/policies/proposals/2016-03
>>
>> And the draft documents at:
>> https://www.ripe.net/participate/policies/proposals/2016-03/draft
>>
>> We want to draw your attention to two changes, which we hope it will
>> make your proposal evaluation easier.
>>
>> -    Policy proposals now contain a diff tool that allows easy
>> comparison of different proposal versions – simply click on the “View
>> Changes” symbol right beside the list of proposal versions.
>> -    The RIPE NCC impact analysis only mentions areas where  the
>> proposal is actually expected to have an impact. For example, if the
>> analysis makes no comment about financial or legal impact, it means
>> that no such impact is expected.
>>
>> We encourage you to read the draft document and send any comments to
>> <address-policy-wg at ripe.net> before 17 November 2016.
>>
>> Regards,
>>
>> Marco Schmidt
>> Policy Development Officer
>> RIPE NCC
>>
>> Sent via RIPE Forum -- https://www.ripe.net/participate/mail/forum
>>
> 
>