[arin-ppml] Advisory Council Meeting Results - March 2011

[Owen DeLong]

Sent from my iPad

On Mar 24, 2011, at 9:26 AM, Chris Grundemann <cgrundemann at gmail.com> wrote:

> On Thu, Mar 24, 2011 at 03:07, William Herrin <bill at herrin.us> wrote:
>> WRT reluctance on the part of the buyer... beggars can't be choosers.
>> There are only so many addresses which will be on the market at any
>> given time. Addresses that aren't under contract may end up selling
>> for less than addresses under contract but they'll still sell. The
>> recipient can use the addresses as soon as I sign a letter of
>> authorization. It's not a big deal if the completed transfer paperwork
>> takes a little while as ARIN validates my claim.
> 
> The primary concern that I have heard raised (and did not catch myself
> on initial thoughts) is not the time that ARIN paperwork might take
> but rather that the outcome may not be what the recipient was
> promised.
> 
> A scenario for illustration:
> Org B needs addresses.
> Org A tells Org B that they have addresses.
> Orgs A and B come to an agreement on price, etc.
> Org A writes an LoA for Org B to begin using the addresses.
> Org A files an LRSA with ARIN.
> ARIN finds that Org A is not authorized to hold nor transfer the
> addresses in question.
> Org B now has a number of problems...
> - wasted time
> - wasted money
> - using addresses that they must return
> - etc...
> 
> I am not trying to argue one way or the other, just pointing out the
> piece of this that eluded me at first in case others missed it as
> well.
> ~Chris
> _______________________________________________
> PPML
> You are receiving this message because you are subscribed to
> the ARIN Public Policy Mailing List (ARIN-PPML at arin.net).
> Unsubscribe or manage your mailing list subscription at:
> http://lists.arin.net/mailman/listinfo/arin-ppml
> Please contact info at arin.net if you experience any issues.

I can't speak for others, but, I clearly understood this from Scott's original
statements. My opinion remains unchanged:

Org B if they ask ARIN will receive an indication that the addresses need to be vetted
before they can be transferred. I am not interested in putting ARIN at risk to prevent Org B suffering the expected consequences of failing to do due diligence.

Org A, if they want their addresses vetted so that Org B doesn't look askance at the deal when they do their due diligence should sign the LRSA for the addresses they plan to transfer, or, should expect Org B to want some assurances and indemnification on the deal and likely a lower price than what they could find for LRSA/RSA-covered addresses.

I regard this as a prime carrot to use for encouraging organizations who want to monetize their address space to sign the (L)RSA.

Owen