[arin-ppml] IPv4 Transfer Policy Change to Keep Whois Accurate
mike at nationwideinc.com
Tue May 24 09:55:10 EDT 2011
Good morning Owen,
> When you tighten up restrictions and begin the process Owen is talking
> about, the revokation and reissuance of space, the potential for conflict
> is ripe.
We aren't talking about tightening up restrictions. We're talking about not
restrictions. The reclamation and reissuance that I have advocated is
already there in
You are the one proposing a change. I have been describing the current state
Mischaracterizing my position as advocating for change (with the implication
are advocating codifying existing practice) really doesn't reflect the
reality of the
OK, not tightening up restrictions, but maybe applying them more forcefully
or frequently than in the past?
I was saying (and I know it's hard to follow) that since network operators
do route sold space currently, the only way they would not do that, IMO, is
if there was a conflict.
Either somebody else is claiming the rights to the address space, or it is
being advertised by somebody else. You have suggested that in that case they
will likely view the RIR as authoritative, which I agree with.
You have suggested that the sale of legacy space from the original
registrant leaves the buyer subject to revokation under ARIN policy,
equivalent to a hijacker, should he fail to come to terms with ARIN on a
And your prescription in this event is to utilize existing policy, which in
your view gives ARIN the right to revoke and reissue those addresses.
My point is that if we take that approach, we end up in conflict, with ARIN
in the possible position of defending a suit for tortious interference in
the contract between a network operator and his customer.
On the other hand, if ARIN's policy were more in alignment with the legal
mileu, wherein huge amounts of companies have been bought and sold using
asset sale agreements which list the IP addresses as assets to be sold, and
where a federal bankruptcy judge found that selling them through this
mechanism was legal, then there would likely be less legal peril for ARIN.
Sure, there will be fights over address rights ownership, like over any
other asset, and courts will use the same tools used today, namely
chain-of-custody review from the original owner to the current claimants.
If ARIN were to content itself with recording the transactions and not
acting as a market regulator, I believe we would see the same effect, namely
efficient use of addresses, with less risk than the confrontational stance
you seem to advocate.
More information about the ARIN-PPML