[arin-ppml] ARIN-prop-148 LRSA resources must not be transferred to LRSA

[Owen DeLong]

On May 11, 2011, at 6:43 AM, Ted Mittelstaedt wrote:

> On 5/10/2011 6:14 PM, Owen DeLong wrote:
>> 
>> On May 10, 2011, at 6:01 PM, Jimmy Hess wrote:
>> 
>>> On Tue, May 10, 2011 at 12:34 PM, ARIN<info at arin.net>  wrote:
>>>> the following sentence is added:
>>>> 
>>>> The recipient of transferred number resources MUST sign the RSA with
>>>> ARIN if the resources being transferred are already under LRSA.
>>>> Resources under LRSA may not be transferred to a recieving organization
>>>> and placed under a new LRSA with that organization.  They must be placed
>>>> under the RSA, not the LRSA.
>>> 
>>> The current NRPM doesn't even mention the LRSA.
>>> So, it's probably not a great idea to refer to a document outside the NRPM.
>>> 
>>> It is conceivable that ARIN staff could develop new RSAs in the future
>>> and call them
>>> something different, or revise the RSA to make it more like the LRSA.
>>> 
>>> I suggest  something more like:
>>> 
>>> The recipient of transferred number resources must sign a standard
>>> Registration Services
>>> Agreement made public by ARIN,  that ensures ARIN retains the right to
>>> charge fees
>>> and revoke resources as needed, to enforce number resource policies, or reclaim
>>> underutilized resources.
>>> 
>>> Every recipient of transferred resources will sign a RSA that provides identical
>>> conditions as the RSA signed by ISP and End user recipients of allocations
>>> provided under 4.2 and 4.3.
>>> 
>> Since by the time this is enacted, there may not be allocations or assignments
>> under 4.2/4.3, may I suggest we refer, instead, to sections 4 and 6 of the
>> NRPM in their entirety.
>> 
> 
> Both excellent points!
> 
> So by your responses, I take it that both of you are in favor of
> the general idea that resources under LRSA, when transferred, should
> be moved into the regular RSA in every practicable instance?
> 
Absolutely. This was the clear intent of the community in the phrasing
of 2009-1, the rationale, and both the community and AC discussions.
The fact that it is possible to do otherwise came as a surprise.

> In short, the LRSA is intended as a single-use device, for the purposes
> of getting true Legacy resources not under any RSA at all, under some
> kind of RSA, and it is not intended for LRSA holders to be able to
> transfer the LRSA to a recipient? (and so on and so on, and forever as
> long as IPv4 shall live?)
> 
Exactly.

Owen
>