[ARIN-consult] Consultation on Transfer Fees Now Open

[Jason Schiller]

Owen,

I like your suggestions, but offer a few friendly amendments.

I think the fee for source block pre-certification should be primarily
based
on the cost to investigate providence of the number space.  Use
that cost as the starting point, and possibly increase the price
if it is not sufficiently high to to discourage abuse of the process.

The research of providence should relate to the entire aggregate
even if only a small portion is considered for transfer.  In other words,
it is a one time resource certification fee for the first transfer out of
the aggregate, and future transfers out of the same aggregate do
not carry an additional fee.


If there are multiple blocks sharing the same providence,
(e.g. company Xyz, Inc. was issues A.B.C.0/20 and D.E.F.0/16.
Company Xyz, Inc. was bought by company Lmno, LLC. and
merged into Newco Inc.) then the fee should cover all of those blocks.

WRT marking, I think it needs to equally apply to resources under RSA or
under pre-certification of providence.  I am agnostic if it needs to be
distinguishable
between RSA and non-RSA pre-certification, or not.

The listing of the providence either needs to be public, or the seller
needs to be
able to get some sort of certified proof from ARIN of its status that can
be used
anonymously by any potential purchaser to verify its authenticity.

I also agree with David, about needing some flexibility in redirecting
payment of these fees.

__Jason






On Thu, Sep 15, 2016 at 8:57 AM, Owen DeLong <owen at delong.com> wrote:

> So I’ve been watching this and thinking about the situation. It occurs to
> me that perhaps we should consider the following:
>
> 1.      Open up a pre-approval process for resource suppliers similar to
> the current pre-approval process
>         for requestors.
>
> 2.      Set a fee for pre-approval that would apply only to resources
> being pre-approved which are not already subject
>         to an RSA. Ideally, this fee should be nominal, but large enough
> to discourage abuse of the process.
>
> 3.      Charge the same fee for any supplier of transferred resources not
> covered by RSA, whether at time of request
>         or in a pre-approval process.
>
> 4.      Possibly provide some mechanism by which entities that wish to do
> so can have their pre-approved resources marked
>         as such in whois and/or STLS.
>
> This fee would be separate from the fee collected for a transfer at the
> time of the transfer, though that fee could, potentially, be reduced
> accordingly to reflect the lower cost of transactions involving known
> resources. In this way, the seller would be responsible for paying the
> provenance costs and the buyer would be responsible for paying the
> administrative costs of processing the transfer.
>
> This seems like a good balance to me.
>
> Thoughts?
>
> Owen
>
> _______________________________________________
> ARIN-Consult
> You are receiving this message because you are subscribed to the ARIN
> Consult Mailing
> List (ARIN-consult at arin.net).
> Unsubscribe or manage your mailing list subscription at:
> http://lists.arin.net/mailman/listinfo/arin-consult Please contact the
> ARIN Member Services
> Help Desk at info at arin.net if you experience any issues.
>



-- 
_______________________________________________________
Jason Schiller|NetOps|jschiller at google.com|571-266-0006
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://lists.arin.net/pipermail/arin-consult/attachments/20160915/9b00d562/attachment.html>