[arin-ppml] ARIN-prop-171 Section 8.4 Modifications: ASN and legacy resources

[Owen DeLong]

On Jun 3, 2012, at 5:08 AM, Martin Hannigan wrote:

>> 
>> 8.4.6 Flawed Custody and Fraudulent Applications
>> 
>> ARIN may reclaim legacy resources that fail chain of custody
>> certifications or are deemed fraudulently obtained at it's discretion.
>> 
>> 
> 
> There has been some feedback that this is not a complete methodology
> to consider with regards to custody. Its likely that some of the
> transactions that would fail a chain of custody review or were
> fraudulently obtained should be revoked, but should be also placed on
> the equivalent of an abandoned property list since the resources have
> value and someone might actually be entitled to that value.
> 
> Does anyone have an opinion on the following rewrite:
> 
> 8.4.6 Flawed Custody and Fraudulent Applications
> 
> ARIN will reclaim resources that fail chain of custody certifications
> or are deemed to have been fraudulently obtained. Such a reclaimed
> resource will be placed on an abandoned resources list which shall be
> available to the public.
> 
> ///end
> 

I prefer the original version. I trust staff to generally do the right thing
and believe that publishing such a list would primarily be a tool for
abuse more than a service to the community.

As has been repeatedly documented, the resources themselves do
not have value, but the registration of those resources for a particular
purpose to a specific entity has value and that value may, under some
circumstances, be transferable within policy.

> The logic here is that with enough information, someone will take the
> effort to find a rightful "owner" if one exists and notify them of the
> same. It is likely that there are a significant amount of resources
> that were overlooked in a variety of transactions, bankruptcy, estates
> of deceased persons, etc.

Far more likely someone will see it as a list of potential hijacking targets.
Even more likely that many will see it as a list of potential hijacking targets.

> I would leave it up to ARIN to determine how long something should be
> on a recovery list, probably aligned with some statute of limitations
> on claims, etc.

I would support the idea of ARIN doing more to reclaim abandoned
resources and make them available for reissue to the community.
Not because I believe this will significantly impact IPv4 runout, but,
because I believe that having better accounting of registrations will
reduce the potential for abuse.

Owen