[members-discuss] Administrative procedures within RIPE NCC: Any way to soften it ?

Hello,
yes, simple merges of two existing LIRs aren't complicated.

But - in some cases (spinoff, company splits, for example) NCC requires
you to start new membership (and pay again signup-fee) instead of
assuming membership /membership transfer to legal sucessor (from
"mother" to "daughter"), even such change in members structure is
properly documented and formally approved by national authorities. Just
because your company registration-number changed among together with
name due to  business structure change.

According to current interpretation of ripe-709 you have to:
1) start new membership (for "daughter")
2) proceed transfer (with transfer agreement)
3) terminate old membership (for "mother")

Instead of (the simple way):
1) update standard service aggreement from "mother" to "daughter"

It seems that *policy* (ripe-709 at this moment) doesn't expect some
normal/realworld business structure changes and due to very strict
interpretation of policy there're more bureaucratic requrements from
NCC, which vere pointed by multiple members here...

- Daniel



On 7/8/20 12:44 PM, Jānis Jaunošāns wrote:
> Greetings,
> I’ve merged 4 over the years, merging was very easy, NCC have always
> been up to the game, helping and pointing what I was missing.
> How the hell a merge can take months and months? :D
> Are you not able to provide the needed docs?
> 
> hand,
> jj
> 
>> On 8 Jul 2020, at 12:54, @exploitation_reseau <noc at ecritel.net
>> <mailto:noc at ecritel.net>> wrote:
>>
>> Hello, 
>>
>> I couldn't say better, each time I have needed to transfert or merge
>> some LIRs it's a pain in the a**.
>>
>> For example my latest transfert #225596. It cost to me months and
>> months to confirm the merge between two companies. Now I have one LIR
>> and a sub LIR for 24months... Yeay... See you again in 2022 to finish
>> the transfert.
>>
>> I hope the RIPE could simplify the process.
>>
>> Such a cumbersome process will inevitably raise the question: Is it
>> really necessary that I waste 6 months of my time for a database which
>> will not reflect reality anyway for at least 2 two years?
>>
>> In the meantime, it is very likely that the people in charge of RIPE
>> have left or have changed jobs. Or that documents are more difficult
>> to find, etc.
>>
>> Regards,
>>
>> Boris PASCAULT
>> Ecritel
>> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
>> *De :* Clement Cavadore <ccavadore at vedege.net
>> <mailto:ccavadore at vedege.net>>
>> *Envoyé :* lundi 6 juillet 2020 15:18
>> *À :* members-discuss at ripe.net <mailto:members-discuss at ripe.net>
>> *Objet :* [members-discuss] Administrative procedures within RIPE NCC:
>> Any way to soften it ?
>>
>> Dear members,
>>
>> I wanted to share my recent experience regarding the painful
>> administrative & bureaucratic procedures within RIPE NCC, and start a
>> discussion with you, in order to see if some of you feel the same, and,
>> if its the case, if we could make it evolve in order to enhance the
>> "customer experience" :-).
>>
>> TL;DR: I feel that the due diligence procedures at RIPE NCC are too
>> strict, and that they should be a bit more human when having to deal
>> with administrative changes.
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> From my own experience, here is what happenned to me:
>>
>> One of my customer (let's call them A) has been a member for years, and
>> it has been acquired/reorganized multiple times before when I started
>> to work with him. As a responsible (new) LIR admin, I wanted to make
>> its administrative status relevant with their real situation.
>> That was a big mistake! 
>> While I can admit that the juridic situation was quite complex, we had
>> to spend months in exchanging documents in order to justify every move,
>> but in the end, the only option that we had, was to open a new LIR, and
>> move its resources from the "legacy LIR" to the new one. We decided at
>> some time, that it was not worth to waste more time than already done,
>> so we did that, and A' was born (and we are going to move A resources
>> to A').
>>
>>
>> ... but a few months later: Same player play again !
>> Another customer of mine (B, which is a sister company of A), needed
>> its membership to be updated, as their original structure has been
>> terminated (integrated in another company, partial merge, rename etc).
>> => Well, after weeks of legal documents exchange, we were told by the
>> RIPE NCC that all the justifications have been verified, and that was
>> we were initially asking was OK... BUT... that they couldn't simply
>> change the name of its LIR, because it has not been a full
>> acquisition. The only valid/useable option would be to make B become a
>> member on its own, and to transfer from the former LIR to that shiny
>> new LIR (other option was to move the resources in A' and make
>> assignations for B, but that is not an option for the end user's org).
>>
>> I have been talking with others members among my contacts, and they all
>> say that having to deal with RIPE NCC on administrative topics is a
>> pain in the ass.
>>
>>
>>
>> My question is simple:
>> 1- Is there some ways to make RIPE NCC a bit more flexible, when the
>> situation allows it?
>>
>> 2- For my particular case: Given that the "historic LIRs" from A & B
>> only had some transferable resources, and given the fact that there
>> were clear justification: Why not simply allowing a LIR name change?
>>
>>
>> I cannot believe that the only option in order to sort out
>> administrative mess, is to open new membership and terminate older
>> membership. I know that RIPE NCC's income will lower in the next
>> future, due to LIR consolidation, but at the moment, I am a bit feeling
>> that the rigid procedures are only a mean for RIPE NCC to get new
>> opening fee and double billing for new members/future closed members.
>>
>>
>> For the RIPE NCC staff: I bet you could easily find which members I am
>> talking about (and if not, I can share the ticket numbers in private).
>> I can understand that your procedures have to be a bit strict in order
>> to avoid resources Hijacks/illegal transfers, but when the situations
>> seems understandable and correct, I'd like to see you exercise good
>> judgment when it seems valid justifications.
>>
>> I just do not want to disclose the member's name publicly, as they
>> didn't ask me to write this email. But since I am managing multiple
>> LIRs, I thought it would be interesting to deal that topic on the
>> membership level. If you have some experiences to share, go ahead !
>>
>>
>> Thanks for reading until the end !
>> -- 
>> Clément Cavadore
>>
>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> members-discuss mailing list
>> members-discuss at ripe.net <mailto:members-discuss at ripe.net>
>> https://mailman.ripe.net/
>> Unsubscribe: https://lists.ripe.net/mailman/options/members-discuss/noc%40ecritel.net
>> _______________________________________________
> 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> members-discuss mailing list
> members-discuss at ripe.net
> https://mailman.ripe.net/
> Unsubscribe: https://lists.ripe.net/mailman/options/members-discuss/danny%40danysek.cz
>