[arin-ppml] LRSA requirement for resources being transferred (Was: ARIN-prop-136 Services Opt-out Allowed for Unaffiliated Address Blocks

Owen DeLong owen at delong.com
Fri Feb 25 01:11:39 EST 2011

On Feb 24, 2011, at 9:10 PM, Matthew Kaufman wrote:

> On 2/24/2011 5:22 PM, Bill Woodcock wrote:
>> Hash: SHA1
>> On Feb 24, 2011, at 5:13 PM, Scott Leibrand wrote:
>>> I'm not sure it should even be necessary for a seller to have an LRSA to release resources under NRPM 8.3: there's nothing in the text of 8.3 that says they need to sign one: it just says " IPv4 number resources within the ARIN region may be released to ARIN by the authorized resource holder...
>> That is correct.  The 8.3 transfer policy specifically places no burden on the seller.  The seller need not be an RSA or LRSA signatory, and presumably in most cases will not be.
> Yes, this appears to be correct, even though a cursory reading of the transfer section suggests otherwise (one needs to remember what "received" means in order to parse it correctly)
> However, it *is* the case that one must have signed the LRSA to list legacy resources in the STLS. Why is that?
While there are those that disagree with me (on the board and likely on the AC too), I believe
that the lack of that requirement in 8.3 was an oversight and not the other way around.

I think that if ARIN is going to facilitate transfers between organizations, it is only prudent to
require a contractual relationship between ARIN and both organizations involved in the
process that prevents (and/or indemnifies) ARIN in the event a dispute between the
organizations later arises.


More information about the ARIN-PPML mailing list