* Sander Steffann
someone has a critical, very hard and slow to move (think dns or something), service in the middle of a chunk of address space they sell. the sales agreement does something kinky to make that service stay up.
this is not a merger.
Ah, then I misunderstood your scenario. Sorry. In the case you describe the current RIPE transfer policy does not allow the transfer to happen.
Current policy says about assignments: «In general, addresses can be replaced on a one-to-one basis. Valid assignments can be replaced with the same number of addresses if the original assignment criteria are still met.» The way I see it, this opens up for the new LIR (the alloc buyer) to inherit the documentation relating to the assignment from the old LIR (the seller), and on that basis make a new assignment that happens to consist of the exact same addresses as before.
Changing the subject...
Question to the WG: I can see the need for something like this (and thinking of it: many other cases as well) to be allowed. The current limits on the transfer policy were set in a time when transfers were not well understood, and limits were placed to avoid abuse of the policy (hoarding, speculation etc). Is it now time to reconsider those limits we placed years ago?
When 2012-09^w2013-02^w2013-03 eventually enters the discussion phase you'll probably get answers to at least some of those questions.. ;-) -- Tore Anderson