On 27 Oct 2025, at 16:12, Wade, Clara via address-policy-wg [wrote][]:
Following the suggestion of the RIPE NCC, we are seeking early feedback on an upcoming policy proposal we currently have in draft status.
I have some observations to make, which I think will need attention before or during the passage of the eventual proposal through the PDP. - Language "proposal to clarify the non-transferability of legacy status" in draft seems inappropriate to me. This is an innovation; it should not be disguised as anything else. Perhaps "clarify the" should read "introduce declaration of". - Making this declaration may be at odds with legacy-resource holders' understanding of the rights included in the original grant of the resources. If so, I believe that principled, as well as pragmatic arguments will be needed as a foundation for the proposal. - As others have pointed out, care will be needed to find an appropriate balance between the advantage of unburdening the NCC, and the disadvantage of potentially losing accuracy. - Decomposing the problem, along the lines Randy suggests, seems to be worth doing in order to simplify our discussions. He seems to me to have identified what I call "onboarding" and "transfer" as the main sub-problems. Prompted by the durations mentioned upthread corresponding to different kinds of transfer request, I suggest a slightly more detailed decomposition. * Onboarding (know your customer) of either or both of the intending donor and recipient of the transfer, unless they are already sufficiently known to the NCC; * Onboarding (proof of title) of the legacy resource to be transferred, if this is not already known to the NCC; * The actual transfer. It seems to me that the burdensome elements are the first and second ones mentioned. I also have some disclosures to make as to my interest in this. - Almost my entire career was spent in the employment of a legacy resource holder; I am still on their (pension) payroll. - I was one of the co-authors of RIPE policy proposal 2012-07, accepted on 6 Feb 2014, saved as RIPE document RIPE-605, and subsequently obsoleted by RIPE document RIPE-639. - For the time being, and until I have refreshed my understanding of the relevant existing RIPE policy proposals and documents, I reserve my personal position on this draft and on the eventual policy proposal. I hope this helps. Niall --- [wrote]: https://mailman.ripe.net/archives/list/address-policy-wg@ripe.net/thread/BUI... [2012-07]: https://www.ripe.net/community/policies/proposals/2012-07/ [RIPE-605]: https://www.ripe.net/publications/docs/ripe-605/ [RIPE-639]: https://www.ripe.net/publications/docs/ripe-639/