[arin-ppml] A Redefinition of IPv4 Need post ARIN run-out (was:Re:Against 2013-4)

[Brandon Ross]

On Wed, 12 Jun 2013, William Herrin wrote:

> On Wed, Jun 12, 2013 at 1:12 PM, Brandon Ross <bross at pobox.com> wrote:
>>
>> How is this a problem unique to the non-needs based, small transfer
>> proposal?  Doesn't this exact problem still exist when you do a needs
>> assessment?
>
> Nope. With a needs assessment in place, we have no cause to care what
> scope the organization uses to define itself. Only activity within
> that scope can be used to justify need. Reporting the same instance of
> need under multiple organizations is fraud.

Please explain how it is not fraud to create a bunch of shell companies 
under your control to accept multiple transfers of IPv4 space to exceed 
the /12 (or whatever size) cap, especially if, as has been suggested by 
others, there must be an attestation to this fact by management of the 
entity?

It seems to me that weather you use shell companies to make it look like 
you comply with a needs assessment or if you use them to avoid a cap, 
either way it's fraud and either way ARIN would have (or not have) the 
same tools to detect that behavior.

> If the shell's use is justified in and of itself, what difference does
> it make that the shell holds the addresses instead of the parent?

None.  Did I argue that somewhere?

-- 
Brandon Ross                                      Yahoo & AIM:  BrandonNRoss
+1-404-635-6667                                                ICQ:  2269442
Schedule a meeting:  https://doodle.com/bross            Skype:  brandonross