[arin-ppml] An article of interest to the community....
mike at nationwideinc.com
Thu Sep 1 15:55:43 EDT 2011
Having a vivid imagination, my mind wanders.
If an RSA holder listed his entire allocation on eBay, would that be cause
for a review?
Suppose a cursory google search indicates the company has been sold or
liquidated, would that be cause for a review?
What if they were not sold or liquidated, but changed business
substantially, say from web hosting to auto mechanic?
What if the lister has had a very recent allocation, would that be cause for
What if the lister is a serial acquirer of companies which he liquidates in
order to monetize addresses, would that be cause for a review?
What if the lister is a bankruptcy trustee and it is public knowledge the
business has been closed and the bankruptcy has proceeded for at least three
years, is that cause for a review?
What if addresses get very valuable, the free pool exhausts, and the next
person in queue for free pool addresses initiates a complaint against the
What if a disgruntled shareholder or employee notifies ARIN that the seller
hasn't used the space in years, and the routes have not been advertised in
BGP for years?
What if the lister is an obnoxious pest on the PPML, would he be reviewed?
My point is that there is a risk to RSA holders who seek to sell addresses,
and that risk will have to be overcome by higher prices.
So maintaining the threat of section 12 will have the effect of limiting the
supply of available addresses and increasing prices for addresses.
You have done all you can to assuage doubts in sellers' minds, so you can
treat the questions above rhetorically, but I still think advisers to
companies considering these sales will consider them risky. After all, what
if they list addresses and the administration and staff at ARIN changes and
becomes more aggressive? Maybe that's an argument for you to be
While I do believe that the "large swaths" of space exist in the legacy
domain, I have been exposed to many companies whose utilization of RSA
addresses is less than 30%. Usually these are webhosting companies who have
lost business to the GoDaddys of the world.
----- Original Message -----
From: "John Curran" <jcurran at arin.net>
To: "Stephen Sprunk" <stephen at sprunk.org>
Cc: <arin-ppml at arin.net>
Sent: Thursday, September 01, 2011 2:53 PM
Subject: Re: [arin-ppml] An article of interest to the community....
> On Sep 1, 2011, at 2:13 PM, Stephen Sprunk wrote:
>> That said, so far it appears ARIN has neither done nor intends to do any
>> without-cause reviews.
> We have not conducted any to my knowledge. In fact, I spent quite
> a bit of time trying to determine when and why a "without cause"
> review would make sense, and I was only able to come up with one
> reason; that is, if ARIN were to undertake a periodic and random
> sampling of the resource holders to determine policy effectiveness.
> While I could understand the academic value of such a review, I
> know that I would not have enjoyed being selected by random lot
> for such an honor (no matter how good the cause) and so I do not
> care to inflict that condition on others.
> However, there is no argument that the option to do such reviews
> is clearly in the section 12 of the NRPM, and one would hope it's
> kept well-protected from capricious use.
> John Curran
> President and CEO
> You are receiving this message because you are subscribed to
> the ARIN Public Policy Mailing List (ARIN-PPML at arin.net).
> Unsubscribe or manage your mailing list subscription at:
> Please contact info at arin.net if you experience any issues.
More information about the ARIN-PPML