Hi, On Wed, Oct 16, 2019 at 11:41:33AM +0100, Paul Thornton wrote:
On 15/10/2019 22:46, Gert Doering wrote:
I am fairly sure there is more to this than "just because receiving party already had a /29" - nothing in the policies would forbid that.
As a datapoint, I certainly have been on the receiving end of this.
Consider this scenario: LIR X has an existing /29, and LIR Y has a /32. Closing LIR Y and transferring all resources to LIR X triggered just such a question.
Having the question asked ("do you still need this?") makes lots of sense, especially if so many /32s (or /29s) are lying around basically unused and could be cleaned up. Now, actually *denying* the transfer if the answer is "yes, I want to keep both" would not be according to my understanding of transfer policy (but the fine print can sometimes be in need of a clarification), so I would be interested in actual refusals where this was the *only* reason, not other stuff. Gert Doering -- NetMaster -- have you enabled IPv6 on something today...? SpaceNet AG Vorstand: Sebastian v. Bomhard, Michael Emmer Joseph-Dollinger-Bogen 14 Aufsichtsratsvors.: A. Grundner-Culemann D-80807 Muenchen HRB: 136055 (AG Muenchen) Tel: +49 (0)89/32356-444 USt-IdNr.: DE813185279