[arin-ppml] Draft Proposal for Needs-Free IPv4 Transfers
jcurran at arin.net
Tue May 10 14:51:25 EDT 2011
On May 10, 2011, at 11:24 AM, Mike Burns wrote:
> Hi Owen,
>> Transfers outside of policy are indistinguishable to ARIN from hijackings. If the
>> recorded recipient is no longer utilizing the addresses and they have been hijacked,
>> ARIN has a responsibility, IMHO, to reclaim those addresses and issue them to an
>> appropriate party through standard ARIN policy.
> But these transfers do happen, and for ARIN to declare them all hijackings, even though legacy holders have no agreement with ARIN to notify them of transfers, is a recipe for the ignoring and increasing irrelevance of whois.
> I hate to keep harping on this, but the bankruptcy docs clearly say these addresses were allocated to Nortel's "predecessors in interest" in the early 1990s.
> Since ARIN became notified that the recorded recipient was no longer utilizing the addresses, why didn't ARIN excercise their responsibility to reclaim those addresses and issue them to an appropriate party through standard ARIN policy?
> Because there is no standard ARIN policy which would allow them to reclaim legacy space.
We do not consider number resources being used by legitimate
successor organizations be "hijacked", regardless of whether
they are ARIN-issued or legacy assignments. Successor means an
entity materially acquiring all of the assets and operations
Whether legacy or ARIN-issued, ARIN encourages parties which
acquire other organizations to put in a transfer request for
the affected resources per NRPM 8.2 (M&A Transfer)
President and CEO
More information about the ARIN-PPML