[arin-ppml] ARIN-prop-140 Business Failure Clarification
jcurran at arin.net
Mon May 2 19:23:38 EDT 2011
On May 3, 2011, at 1:10 AM, David Farmer wrote:
> Actually, if all resources were under RSA or LRSA we really wouldn't need this at all, ARIN could reclaim resources for non-payment, following that process defined in the contracts. This works under the theory that if someone isn't paying the bills the organization is no longer functioning, which is more or less usually true. In the case a bankruptcy, the bankruptcy trustee would either need to pay ARIN or seek relief for the terms of the contract, both of which are valid and would be under to supervision of the bankruptcy judge, and in the realm of the lawyers and not really a policy problem.
> The problem is that most Legacy resources are not under an LRSA or RSA at this time. Therefore we need some kind of mechanism to know when ARIN should look to reclaim Legacy Resource from defunct organizations that do not have an LRSA or RSA to define a process to recover said resources. This is the crux of the issue for the hijacking and several other threads on PPML.
This is not correct, even with resources under RSA.
A policy which states "ARIN should reclaim resources in
bankruptcies" would be *contrary to law* in some cases.
Policy which directs ARIN staff contrary to law is
unlikely to adopted by the ARIN Board of Trustees.
President and CEO
More information about the ARIN-PPML