Hi,
Feedback on this document should be sent to the address-policy-wg@localhost mailing list for a period of two weeks.
In paragraph 3 of section 5.0, we have " If an LIR is planning to exchange or transfer address space it needs to contact the RIPE NCC so that the changes can be properly registered. Please note that the LIR always remains responsible for the entire allocation it receives from the RIPE NCC. " Should the second sentence have at the end "until the allocation has been officially transferred to another LIR with the authorisation of the RIPE NCC" ? Since I would have thought that after an LIR has transferred an allocation to another LIR, then it no longer needs to remain responsible for it. Section 5.4 ends with "LIRs not wishing to lose address space in this way should ensure that the status of the sub-allocation is clear in any contracts between the LIR and the downstream network operator." I recommend that it be emphasised that it is the LIR's responsibility to do this, not RIPE NCC's. By the time we reach section 7.0, the Assignment Window has been mentioned many times; I recommend we move this section to somewhere earlier in the document. Near the end of section 7.0, training is mentioned. RIPE NCC's own training courses, with associated URL, could also be mentioned here. In the last paragraph of section 9.0 we have "If an LIR has an End User that requires PI address space they should refer the End User to an appropriate registry. " Does this mean that if an ISP, who is an LIR, is approached by a customer who says they require PI space, that the LIR should simply give the RIPE NCC URLs and email addresses to the customer, so they can send the request themselves to RIPE NCC? Or can the LIR send the request, on behalf of the customer, to the RIPE NCC? Otherwise, the document looks good to me! :-) Best regards, Emma