[arin-ppml] REVISED: Draft Policy ARIN-2012-8: Aligning 8.2 and 8.3 Transfer Policy

[Milton L Mueller]

I cannot support this policy. It seems to be ARIN attempting to unilaterally change the terms of a contract or assert control simply because a transfer of existing rights has taken place through a merger or acquisition. If a company acquires another company it should acquire the rights that the existing company has. I see no justification for ARIN seizing upon the transfer as an excuse to change those rights. 

On process grounds I also think it it bit unseemly for the AC to send this to last call a few days before a new elected AC comes into office. I think it should wait and allow the new crew to deal with it. 

> -----Original Message-----
> From: arin-ppml-bounces at arin.net [mailto:arin-ppml-bounces at arin.net] On
> Behalf Of David Farmer
> Sent: Monday, December 10, 2012 5:44 PM
> To: arin-ppml at arin.net
> Subject: Re: [arin-ppml] REVISED: Draft Policy ARIN-2012-8: Aligning 8.2
> and 8.3 Transfer Policy
> 
> Depending on the traditions you follow, the holidays are or very soon
> will be upon us; Nevertheless, please look at the following text and
> provide your comments to the AC.
> 
> BE ADVISED, the AC is likely to consider sending this text to last call
> at its meeting next week.  Please let us know your opinion, even if it
> is you simply support or not the text as written.
> 
> Thanks and Happy Holidays.
> 
> On 11/26/12 15:25 , Chris Grundemann wrote:
> > I made some updates based on feedback received here, the new text is
> as follows:
> >
> > ----8<----8<----
> > Replace the first paragraph of section 8.2 with the following (second
> > paragraph remains unchanged):
> >
> > ARIN will consider requests for the transfer of number resources in
> > the case of mergers and acquisitions under the following conditions:
> >
> > * The new entity must provide evidence that they have acquired assets
> > that use the resources transferred from the current registrant. ARIN
> > will maintain an up-to-date list of acceptable types of documentation.
> > * The current registrant must not be involved in any dispute as to the
> > status of the transferred resources.
> > * The new entity must sign an RSA covering all transferred resources.
> > * The transferred resources will be subject to ARIN policies.
> > * The minimum transfer size is the smaller of the original allocation
> > size or the applicable minimum allocation size in current policy.
> > ----8<----8<----
> >
> > Cheers,
> > ~Chris
> >
> >
> > On Mon, Nov 19, 2012 at 9:39 PM, Owen DeLong <owen at delong.com> wrote:
> >>
> >> On Nov 19, 2012, at 7:56 PM, Jimmy Hess <mysidia at gmail.com> wrote:
> >>
> >>> On 11/19/12, Owen DeLong <owen at delong.com> wrote:
> >>>
> >>>> IOW, I want to avoid extending the more lenient 8.2 provisions to a
> >>>> sale where someone buys $100,000 worth of IP addresses and $20,000
> >>>> worth of hardware and then sells the hardware to $SCRAP_DEALER just
> >>>> to keep the addresses.
> >>>
> >>> IP addresses don't belong to hardware;  IP addresses belong to IP
> >>> interfaces, attached to hardware, in order to provide connectivity
> to
> >>> a network node for communicating or offering a service.     A change
> >>> of hardware does not imply that the need for the logical IP
> interface
> >>> goes away.     If you send a router to a scrap dealer, that doesn't
> >>> mean all the networks it routed necessarily go away.
> >>>
> >>
> >> The above statement was short-hand to explain my intent, not an
> >> absolute statement implying that addresses were attached directly to
> hardware.
> >> Put it back in context with what I was responding to.
> >>
> >>> What about cases, where the acquiring organization finds the
> hardware
> >>> _belongs_ with  $TRASH_COLLECTION or $SCRAP_DEALER    due to the
> >>> obsolescence of said decrepit hardware,   and after acquiring,  they
> >>> will make a non-disruptive reallocation of the hardware used to
> >>> provide IT services?      Probably by re-consolidating on new
> >>> hardware.
> >>>
> >>
> >> The policy language I proposed would not preclude this.
> >>
> >>> That kind of restructuring does not make renumbering reasonable and
> >>> doesn't belong under 8.3.
> >>
> >> Agreed. However, I want to make sure that 8.2 does not get abused to
> >> back-door 8.3 style transfers by adding hardware to the mix and
> >> pretending it is an acquisition of a working network.
> >>
> >> Owen
> >>
> >> _______________________________________________
> >> PPML
> >> 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:
> >> http://lists.arin.net/mailman/listinfo/arin-ppml
> >> Please contact info at arin.net if you experience any issues.
> >
> >
> >
> 
> 
> --
> ================================================
> David Farmer               Email: farmer at umn.edu
> Office of Information Technology
> University of Minnesota
> 2218 University Ave SE     Phone: 1-612-626-0815
> Minneapolis, MN 55414-3029  Cell: 1-612-812-9952
> ================================================
> _______________________________________________
> PPML
> 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:
> http://lists.arin.net/mailman/listinfo/arin-ppml
> Please contact info at arin.net if you experience any issues.