<html><head><meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html charset=utf-8"></head><body style="word-wrap: break-word; -webkit-nbsp-mode: space; -webkit-line-break: after-white-space;" class="">Dear colleagues,<div style="orphans: 2; widows: 2;" class=""><br class=""></div><div style="orphans: 2; widows: 2;" class=""><font color="#333333" class="">Regarding the </font>[address-policy-wg] 2015-04 New Version and Impact Analysis Published (RIPE Resource Transfer Policies):</div><div style="orphans: 2; widows: 2;" class=""><br class=""></div><div style="orphans: 2; widows: 2;" class=""><div style="orphans: auto; widows: auto;" class="">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.</div><div style="orphans: auto; widows: auto;" class=""><br class=""></div><div style="orphans: auto; widows: auto;" class="">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?</div><div style="orphans: auto; widows: auto;" class=""><br class=""></div><div style="orphans: auto; widows: auto;" class="">Best Regards</div><div style="orphans: auto; widows: auto;" class="">Niculae Plesa</div><div style="orphans: auto; widows: auto;" class=""><br class=""></div><div style="orphans: auto; widows: auto;" class=""><br class=""></div><div class=""><br class=""></div></div></body></html>