Hello! Any good solution should be start taking effect in the future rather than retroactively, it should be fair and transparent,... So I would like to propose two solutions to this dilemma: a) All ipv4 resources received from the the waiting list requests submitted after 2022-01-01 are non-transferable and bound to the LIR that has requested the resource. b) All ipv4 resources received from the the waiting list requests submitted after 2022-01-01 are non-transferable for the next 60 months. Suggestion (b) would bring us more in line with how ARIN handles requests. Whereas #1 would favor small LIR's. Both solutions create almost 0 additional strain on the current processes. kind regards Sebastian Graf This has the advantage of being "fair" On 12/7/21 18:31, Gert Doering wrote:
Hi,
On Tue, Dec 07, 2021 at 06:25:21PM +0100, denis walker wrote:
Many years ago I questioned why we ever invented a market for address space 'that no one owns' when we had a perfectly good system of allocating address space based on need and when no longer needed was returned to the RIR to be re-allocated...for free. I was told 'don't be silly, people will still sell the address space but not record the transfers in the RIPE Database'. So the quality of the registry diminishes. What is going to stop people selling these 'never to be transferred' allocations and not recording the transfer in the RIPE Database? I am sure some back door dealings can be arranged to keep the LIRs active that have the allocations registered and obfuscate the fee payments to confuse the RIPE NCC. Have companies developed some sense of morality in recent years? If the LIR fee is still to be paid, this is commercially not very attractive - and as such, should stop the business model "open a LIR, get a /24 for <x> EUR, sell it for <5*x>" nicely.
Note that we always acknowledged the need for a block of addresses to "change hands", by mergers & acquisition. Having a formal transfer policy was basically just accepting that people would hide this in a company sale otherwise.
My proposal is actually to disallow transfers *including* disallowing M&A transfers on these. It MUST stay in the LIR it was requested by, and if the LIR closes, it MUST be returned.
Buying a "company with the LIR" would still be possible, of course (and I do not see a way to disallow this, it's like MS trying to disallow selling used windows licenses), but "... and then transferring, and closing the LIR" would not.
Gert Doering -- NetMaster