Gert Doering wrote:
Nick Hilliard - "because it will create underground and unregistered transfers of non-transferrable /22s"
answered by Sander Steffan
I should have replied at the time because Sander's response was, in my opinion, inadequate: Sander Steffann wrote:
Not transferring the resources means keeping the LIR running to hold them. If the LIR closes then the resources go back to the NCC and the unregistered new holder will end up with empty hands. Both the cost of keeping the LIR open (which will rise beyond the cost of "legally" buying space after a few years) and the risk for the receiver to lose their address space if the seller stops paying the NCC membership fee are strong incentives to just stop trading in ALLOCATED FINAL space.
This just means that the price stays higher, not that underground transfers / rentals won't happen or become a problem.
And M&A is still possible if people really want to move this address space around, and that will make sure the registration is updated.
This subverts the intention of 2016-03: 1. register company for £12 at the UK Companies Registration Office 2. open LIR in the name of this company 3. sell company to existing LIR and handle under M&A Net cost difference: £12. I.e. if you have it one way, the intent of the proposal is subverted; if you have it the other, the charter for the RIPE database is violated. Nick