[arin-ppml] Borders sells their /16 block

[Chris Engel]

> However, the key phrase is "good for the buyer". It apparently has not been
> in anyone's interest to ignore ARIN during an IPv4 address trade. But if a
> buyer is told "no" to a Whois update, then we might expect a different
> outcome - one where ARIN is bypassed. And if sellers find better prices from
> a larger market (i.e. beyond those buyers willing to "justify need" to ARIN)
> then the probability of this conflict may increase.
> 
> Please note that I'm not advocating the above conflict. I would explicitly
> advise all parties against it. However, I do recognize it as a possibility - as a
> likelihood, even. Therefore I do advocate that we plan for it.
> 
> There are multiple (completed and pending) trades that do not have broad
> visibility. The lack of transparency means we may not know until after the
> fact, if ever, how these conclude. But nothing has yet proven that ARIN has
> any legal authority over these kind of transactions. This community should
> consider ways to avoid finding out, by being more accommodating to
> economic and legal reality.
> 
> Cheers,
> -Benson

Benson,

Thanks, although I do have to wonder what was actualy being sold if a company had the intention of bypassing ARIN & WHOIS.  I mean why would an entity need to pay anyone $12 per address to assign IP addresses to thier servers that weren't going to be listed authoritatively by ARIN....when they could do the same exact thing for FREE right now?

I mean ARIN doesn't control what addresses are assigned to individual machines on someones network.  They just control the listing service that most carriers elect to use when determining where stuff gets routed,  or am I missing something?  So if you didn't care about authoritative WHOIS listing....why would you go pay some other company millions of dollars for address space that you could just unilateraly assign yourself (and face the exact same consequences for not having listed in WHOIS). 


Christopher Engel