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

[Kevin Kargel]

> -----Original Message-----
> From: arin-ppml-bounces at arin.net [mailto:arin-ppml-bounces at arin.net] On
> Behalf Of Owen DeLong
> Sent: Wednesday, May 11, 2011 12:13 PM
> To: Ted Mittelstaedt
> Cc: arin-ppml at arin.net
> Subject: Re: [arin-ppml] ARIN-prop-148 LRSA resources must not be
> transferred to LRSA
> 
> 
> 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.

I will agree and try to clarify by stating that "Legacy" 'rights' apply to the 'Legacy' organization, not the number resource and are non-transferrable.  To my way of thinking when a numbered resource leaves the original 'Legacy' holders dominion it no longer carries any aegis granted to it by the 'Legacy' holders status.  At that moment the resource becomes common.

> 
> > 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
> >
>