On Oct 21, 2016 13:42, "Sascha Luck [ml]" <apwg@c4inet.net> wrote:
On Fri, Oct 21, 2016 at 01:17:32PM +0200, Havard Eidnes wrote:
As for 2015-04, I oppose it as it tries yet again to bring M&A under policy regulation (s. 2.2) which the community has no business doing.
Please educate me why the community has no business doing this. I would have thought that was well within scope for the address policy.
In market-based economies, M&As -including the disposal of assets- are a matter for the parties involved and, occasionally, a state
regulator, which the NCC is NOT.
It is unthinkable in such a society that business decisions are subject to the whim of random people on a mailing list. The RIPE NCC recognises that and puts M&A firmly outside policy. Where it should remain unless the desire is that every transfer application or M&A notification start with filing suit against the NCC.
I think our main problem here is that people think of IP space handed out by RIRs to be an asset just as a datacenter building or a router. It is not, it is a right to use a resources given a few limitation (ncc member ship is one). However pre RIR IP space might be considered an assets as I see it. --- Roger J ---
rgds, Sascha Luck