[arin-ppml] IPv4 Transfer Policy Change to Keep Whois Accurate

[Mike Burns]

Hi Jimmy,

>
> It is little different than use of a forged LOA, really.
> The network operator will typically take _anything_  that looks like
> plausible documentation.
> If the document is forged or otherwise invalid, the responsibility is
> now on the customer's head,
> and the network operator can plead ignorance.
>

This is my experience as well.
The network operator requires a CoverYourAss document from the entity 
seeking routing of their addresses.
When the likelihood of conflicting claims potentially rising after the free 
pool empties, this behavior on the part of network operators might no longer 
be sufficient.
The network operator community probably would like access to a reliable 
authoritative registry.
.
>
> This is not a problem with addressing policy; it's a weakness of the
> routing system,

It's only a problem with addressing policy if policy drives registrants 
away.

> and certified resources / RPKI  could eventually offer a solution.

Agreed.

> But legitimate organizations would usually like some certainty that
> they have the
> IP addresses,  they are on record as having the IP addresses, they are 
> under
> proper agreement,  and they won't incur a disruption or loss of number
> resources
> impacting their business  as a result of not doing things right and
> having mucked up records.
>

I agree completely that legitimate businesses hate FUD and want reliable 
registration and control of their addresses.

Regards,
Mike