<html><head><meta http-equiv="content-type" content="text/html; charset=utf-8"></head><body dir="auto"><div>Hi Sascha, </div><div><br></div><div>The policy proposal states :</div><div><br></div><div><h4 style="margin: 0.75em 0px 12px; padding: 0px; box-sizing: border-box; font-weight: 500; max-width: 700px;"><span style="background-color: rgba(255, 255, 255, 0);">> 2.2 Transfer Restrictions</span></h4><p style="margin: 0px 0px 12px; padding: 0px; box-sizing: border-box; max-width: 700px;"><span style="background-color: rgba(255, 255, 255, 0);">> Scarce resources, which are understood as those resources that are allocated or assigned >by the RIPE NCC on a restricted basis (such as IPv4 or 16-bit ASNs), cannot be >transferred for 24 months from the date the resource was received by the resource holder. >This restriction also applies if the resource was received due to a change in the >organisation’s business (such as a merger or acquisition). </span></p><div><br></div><div>Point 2.2 already states what is to be understood by scares resources. All RIPE NCC issued IPv4 and 16bit ASNs. </div><div><br></div><div>That means indeed as the IA states : PI IPv4 and IPv4 PA space and 16 bit ASNs .. </div><div><br></div><div>Is there something missing ? </div><div><br></div><div>Regards,</div><div>Erik Bais </div></div><div><br>Op 6 feb. 2016 om 19:57 heeft Sascha Luck [ml] <<a href="mailto:apwg@c4inet.net">apwg@c4inet.net</a>> het volgende geschreven:<br><br></div><blockquote type="cite"><div><span>On Sat, Feb 06, 2016 at 02:54:33PM +0100, Tore Anderson wrote:</span><br><blockquote type="cite"><span>[x] yes, this makes sense, go there</span><br></blockquote><span></span><br><span>+1 However: I'd like to see a paragraph defining which resources are</span><br><span>"scarce resources" That way, it is immediately clear which</span><br><span>resources are covered by hold times etc, and more importantly</span><br><span>there is a formal process by which a resource is declared "scarce"</span><br><span>(through the PDP). The impact statement currently states:</span><br><span></span><br><span>"The RIPE NCC understands "scarce resources" to include IPv4 PA,</span><br><span>IPv4 PI and 16-bit AS Numbers. If the community declares other</span><br><span>resources to be scarce, the list of resources for which the</span><br><span>holding period will apply will be adjusted accordingly."</span><br><span></span><br><span>This needs to be part of the policy to avoid doubt and increase</span><br><span>clarity to both NCC personnel and resource holders.</span><br><span></span><br><blockquote type="cite"><span>Remco suggested adding references to the new policy document in</span><br></blockquote><blockquote type="cite"><span>lieu of the removed sections in ripe-638, ripe-649, and</span><br></blockquote><blockquote type="cite"><span>ripe-655. I would not object to that.</span><br></blockquote><span></span><br><span>Sensible addition. </span><br><span>rgds,</span><br><span>Sascha Luck</span><br><span></span><br></div></blockquote></body></html>