[arin-ppml] Policy Proposal 2008-2: IPv4 Transfer Policy Proposal -Revised

[Milton L Mueller]

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Scott Leibrand [mailto:sleibrand at internap.com]
> "The IPv4 block must be administered by ARIN, for example as part of
an
> address block assigned by IANA to ARIN, or as part of a legacy address
> block allocated within the ARIN service area."

Close, I would say that: 

"The IPv4 block transferred must be one administered by ARIN, either as
part of an address block assigned by IANA to ARIN, or as part of a
legacy address block allocated within the ARIN service area." 

> > I would reword as "...may seek pre-qualification from ARIN to
> > authenticate its prior assignment or allocation of the address
resources
> > offered for transfer."
> 
> There is also the question of whether the 12-month clock has elapsed
such
> that the space is eligible for transfer.

OK, so it's:

"...may seek pre-qualification from ARIN to authenticate its prior
assignment or allocation of the address resources offered for transfer
and its compliance with transfer time limits."

The idea is just to avoid purely discretionary blockages of transfers.
But if I'm getting to be too much like a lawyer, shoot me.

> That's part of it.  Imagine a large company with multiple
subsidiaries,
> one of which requests and receives a large block of addresses just
before
> ARIN runs out.  If the other subsidiary then turns around 6 months
later
> and wants to offer (different) addresses for transfer, this clause
would
> require that they tell ARIN about the other subsidiaries, so that ARIN
can
> consider whether their behavior, in aggregate, complies with the
policy.
> In this case, it would be the transferor under 2008-2 who'd be out of
line
> with the policy, hence the need for common-control disclosure there as
> well.

Sure, it's another speculation check, understood. Does ARIN have the
resources to check compliance with the reporting requirements? 

> Thanks for your comments,

welcome