[arin-ppml] ARIN-prop-140 Business Failure Clarification

[John Curran]

On May 2, 2011, at 10:02 PM, Matthew Kaufman wrote:

> I want it to be the case that anyone can flip open the NRPM, see the rule, and know that that's how things will be.

Alas, we cannot provide meaningful legal advice to parties via the 
NRPM, and yet a party going into bankruptcy cannot know "how things 
will be" until comparing their circumstances to applicable law.

> So, in this case, the fact that the NRPM suggests that ARIN should be going after resources when a company goes bankrupt means that ARIN's actions *seem* to not match the policy (to anyone who reads the policy as requiring ARIN to do that).

Per 8.1 presently, the POC notifies ARIN.  Depending on circumstances,
ARIN may be able to reclaim the resources or not.  If your consulting
business is no more, with no creditors at your door, we are likely able
to do so.  If it is an entity entering various bankruptcy proceedings,
the exact circumstances are necessary to know what happens next.

> In other words I attribute the confusion here not to ARIN staff but to those who might be trying to figure out what ARIN might do in a given context based on what is written down in the NRPM.

We can put anything we want in the NRPM; it will not clarify the matter for 
a party entering reorganization; e.g. if number resources are necessary for 
ongoing operations, they may be executory in nature and subject to an entirely
different set of guidelines then if they are not essential.  The number
resources may not be considered an asset, or they might, and in either case 
may be considered separable from ARIN's services and policies (or not).

>> 2) ARIN must handle bankruptcies in compliance with appropriate law;
>>  encoding a specific legal approach within policy is both ill-advised 
>>  and inconsistent with the Policy Development Process which states 
>>  that ARIN business practices are not policy matters.
> 
> Yes, agreed.
> 
> Perhaps that is a much better way of wording this policy so that the NRPM simply notes that ARIN will comply with applicable bankruptcy law and does not suggest that ARIN will be attempting to reclaim resources until they are really and truly "abandoned".


Compliance with law is a good thing, but as expected is already included 
in the direction I've received from the ARIN Board.

The only guidance that would help ARIN in this matter is whether (in light
of the existence of a specified transfer policy) you would like ARIN to 
always work first towards return of resources, and if/when that's not 
possible to then advise of transfers per 8.3, or whether we are to omit 
reclamation efforts (where it may be an option) and always direct any
legitimate parties to NRPM 8.3 transfers.

Hope this helps,
/John

John Curran
President and CEO
ARIN