On Thu, 11 Feb 2016, Sascha Luck [ml] wrote:
On Thu, Feb 11, 2016 at 05:25:09PM +0100, Gert Doering wrote:
Thus, I think the NCC should not permit single entities to open up multiple LIRs to weasel around policy restrictions.
That I could get behind, because this offence, as stated, requires two facts to be true:
a) an entity opens another LIR AND b) it does so in order to circumvent policy
So, opening another LIR would require the NCC to ascertain motive before it approves the second LIR and *that* I could live with. For instance, someone trying to open $lots_of_lirs in a short time frame would be strong circumstantial evidence that they are up to no good...
+1 Of course whenever you have rules, someone will be trying to get around them. Stopping "single legal entities" to open additional LIR:s will not make it impossible to still get several /22:s but at least we will not encourage such behaviour. At the time for RIPE 71 I was told that NCC staff were very frustrated because they could see this kind of applications and there were not much they could do about it. Apparently there are/were cases when entities - or natural persons - were opening *lots* of LIR:s in order to merge them as soon as they received the /22 IPv4. Cheers, Daniel _________________________________________________________________________________ Daniel Stolpe Tel: 08 - 688 11 81 stolpe@resilans.se Resilans AB Fax: 08 - 55 00 21 63 http://www.resilans.se/ Box 45 094 556741-1193 104 30 Stockholm