[arin-ppml] Borders sells their /16 block

[Martin Hannigan]

On Wed, Dec 7, 2011 at 6:31 PM, Stephen Sprunk <stephen at sprunk.org> wrote:
> On 07-Dec-11 17:28, Martin Hannigan wrote:
>> On Wed, Dec 7, 2011 at 6:09 PM, Benson Schliesser <bensons at queuefull.net> wrote:
>>> Based on this same logic, I also suspect that ARIN could not have objected in the Nortel case because they didn't have standing at the time. I'm hopeful that John will clarify this point, as I requested in my previous email.
>> I don't see why ARIN would not be at a disadvantage in either, to be honest. The Borders documents make it clear that they are.
>>
>> You also don't have to be a lawyer to understand that no one is going to buy addresses for almost $1M or transfer a deposit without some assurances that ARIN won't be able to later take them away.
>
> ... and those assurances are provided by the LRSA the buyer signs, not
> by the bankruptcy court.

I don't doubt it. But I do doubt that "all" ARIN policies are being
enforced or interpreted as they may with you or I outside of such a
proceeding.

Best,

-M<