Search RPD Archives
Limit search to: Subject & Body Subject Author
Sort by:

[rpd] Merges/Acquisitions/Closures document

Adiel Akplogan adiel at
Thu Feb 20 14:20:27 UTC 2014

On 2014-02-20, at 14:43 PM, Saul Stein <saul at> wrote:

>>> . but in Saul's case there is nothing stopping him as an LIR doing a
> sub-assignment to the other company which would then push him over the 75%
> mark on the >holding company, then applying for more space under the holding
> company.
>>> This would be completely within the rules and totally legitimate.
>> Absolutely correct. 
> Just because something is legitimate because it is within the rules, doesn't
> mean that is makes sense or that it should be like that at all!
> That is like saying if it aint broke, don't fix....  which is what I think
> Andrew is after, is to make things work better!

… and I'm not sure why you think I meant the contrary. I just confirm Andrew's option of legitimately using sub-allocations to solve your issue differently. No link with the need for a new policy or not.

- a.
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 313 bytes
Desc: Message signed with OpenPGP using GPGMail
URL: <>

More information about the RPD mailing list