Hi Erik, It may increase the cost or make it make less attractive, but I believe it would be just a temporary affect. Making less attractive is not a good argument to support it (to me) Regards, Arash Naderpour -----Original Message----- From: Erik Bais [mailto:erik@bais.name] Sent: Tuesday, June 09, 2015 11:48 AM To: Arash Naderpour; 'Gert Doering' Cc: address-policy-wg@ripe.net Subject: RE: [address-policy-wg] 2015-01 Draft Document and Impact Analysis Published Hi Arash,

"This policy proposal will not prevent organisations from setting up one or more LIRs and hoarding the /22s. It will only add a two-year restriction before a /22 from the last /8 can be transferred."

The 24 month period will increase the cost of the 'hoarding' ... which makes it a lot less attractive to do it.. This policy change will make it a lot more expensive for the current 'abusers of the intent of the policy' to see this as a viable business model.. Regards, Erik Bais