[arin-ppml] ARIN-prop-173 Revisions to M&A TransferRequirements(Updated Version)

David Farmer farmer at umn.edu
Thu Jul 5 18:24:25 EDT 2012

On 7/5/12 17:17 CDT, Michael Sinatra wrote:
> On 07/05/12 13:31, sandrabrown at ipv4marketgroup.com wrote:
>> 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 work, and thus, the ARIN database would remain out of date.
> To the extent that this proposal exempts M&A transfers from any
> renumbering requirement (or even encouragement), it introduces a
> double-standard into the NRPM.  As an example, section requires
> small multihomers (I love that word!) to renumber upon getting
> additional assignments.  Note the opposition on this mailing list to
> proposal 167, which would have mitigated that requirement.  While not
> expressing an opinion as to who should "have to" renumber, I do not
> think the NRPM should have the effect, intended or otherwise, of placing
> greater renumbering onus on small entities versus large ones.  If we're
> concerned about routing table bloat from the mom-and-pops, then we
> should be concerned about it from M&A transfers, regardless of the size
> of the merger or acquisition.  Likewise, if it was "too hard" for a
> Nortel to consider renumbering, why is it so much easier for a
> mom-and-pop to renumber?  Mom-and-pops don't have to renumber as much,
> but they don't have the same resources at their disposal to throw at the
> renumbering task.

I'm missing something here, how does renumbering apply to this discussion?

David Farmer               Email:farmer at umn.edu
Networking & Telecommunication Services
Office of Information Technology
University of Minnesota	
2218 University Ave SE	    Phone: 612-626-0815
Minneapolis, MN 55414-3029   Cell: 612-812-9952

More information about the ARIN-PPML mailing list