[arin-ppml] ARIN-prop-173 Revisions to M&A TransferRequirements(Updated Version)
jcurran at arin.net
Thu Jul 5 16:43:55 EDT 2012
On Jul 5, 2012, at 4:31 PM, sandrabrown at ipv4marketgroup.com wrote:
> I support Marc Lindsay's proposal. It woud be a significant improvement
> over the current 8.2. While I was with Nortel, we avoided transferring
> any legacy blocks that were in the names of Bay Networks, Xylogics,
> Synoptics, and other past acquisitions, as it made no sense to go
> through needs assessment as part of that process.
> Also, as I have posted in the past, I believe the accuracy of the
> registration database is the most important duty of the ARIN Advisory
> Council, and this will help the AC to fulfill that duty.
> Think of the numerous companies that are partially using their blocks,
> have no intention of monetizing those blocks, and they, under the
> current 8.2 policy, would have to prove their needs assessment to
> justify keeping addresses in order to update their registration.
> At present, I don't think they will come forward, and risk being told to
> aggregate internally generating tons of engineering and operational
> work, and thus, the ARIN database would remain out of date. While ARIN
> often promises to behave reasonably, and has historically tried to make
> its own rules work, this case would require something secret like a
> fictitious needs assessment, and I have only heard that to be in
> Microsoft and Cerner's copies of the ARIN Manual.
I have no view on the benefits or risks of the policy proposal in
question, but will note for the record that all transfer that have
been completed to date have been in compliance with policy, including
necessary needs-assessment. If you are aware of any case with number
resources being transferred contrary to adopted policy, please report
it via the ARIN number resource fraud reporting form which is available
President and CEO
More information about the ARIN-PPML