[arin-ppml] Transfer Proposals

Stephen Sprunk stephen at sprunk.org
Tue Sep 30 01:33:39 EDT 2008

mack wrote:
> This is my $.02
> The current proposals are flawed.
> For most of us being able to execute a transfer is a breach of our current contract with ARIN.
> The RSA most of us have signed says we have to return unused space if we no longer need it.
> The only people who haven't signed such an RSA are the legacy holders.

I don't see where the RSA says that; §8 does say that the holder must 
comply with policies, but policy only says that the resources must be 
"justified", not "needed".  If an org decides to free up some of its 
resources by becoming more efficient than policy requires (e.g. 
deploying NAT), there is also no policy that enables ARIN to take those 
addresses away -- and if there were, what motivation would folks have to 
incur those costs?  Part of the paid transfer idea is to financially 
motivate orgs to give unnecessary (but justified or legacy) resources to 
someone else who does actually need them.


More information about the ARIN-PPML mailing list