[anti-abuse-wg] RIPE policy

Ronald,

On Mar 8, 2011, at 5:10 PM, Ronald F. Guilmette wrote:

[…]

>> I asked you to clarify what you meant and gave an example of a legitimate s
>> ituation.
> 
> With all due respect, no.  You gave an example of a situation which you
> personally believe to be in some sense ``legitimate''.
> 
> Is there a document somewhere, either within RIPE or ICANN, that says
> explicitly that ``satellite connectivity providers'' may do X, Y, and Z?

You appear to be taking the approach that only what is explicitly permitted is allowed. However, I am sure that the principle applied is that everything is allowed unless we all, as the RIPE community, agree to restrict it.

>> Asking again: do you mean selling connectivity services?

[…]

> What EXACTLY do you mean by ``selling connectivity services''.  Please be
> precise.  Then I might be able to provide an answer to your question.

The dictionary definition, such as this one from the American Heritage dictionary, is fine. 

"The ability to make and maintain a connection between two or more points in a telecommunications system: a phone company that offers excellent Internet connectivity."

[…]

>> Selling address blocks without connectivity is different from selling them 
>> with it.
> 
> It is?
> 
> Why do you assert that those two things are ``different''?

As I read the current IPv4 policy, address space transfers that are not used for a connection to the provider have to be made according to the transfer policy in section 5.5:

http://www.ripe.net/ripe/docs/ripe-509#----transfers-of-allocations

It is entirely possible that I am wrong and if so, please let me know how.

Regards,

Leo