[arin-ppml] Draft Policy 2012-3: ASN Transfers

[Matthew Kaufman]

On 3/23/2012 8:18 PM, Owen DeLong wrote:
> On Mar 23, 2012, at 5:26 PM, Matthew Kaufman wrote:
>
>> On 3/16/2012 2:23 PM, Tom Vest wrote:
>>> The knowledge that route (a) was originated by AS (x) is only meaningful insofar as one has some set of high-confidence beliefs/expectations about AS (x). However, if AS (x) can change hands at will, henceforth no such confidence will be possible for the overwhelming majority if not all ASes.
>> I would point out that this fact is *already* true, as ASNs are transferred through merger and acquisition all the time, and have been for over a decade.
>>
>> I don't see anyone proposing a policy where an entity is required to return (and have permanently marked as unavailable) their ASN when ownership changes... I see, for instance, that AS 1 and AS 701 are still out there, despite the above happening several times, and yet nothing terrible has happened as a result.
>>
> I don't see acquiring the reputation of a network when acquiring the entire network as being all that likely to be harmful.

What makes you think that ASNs acquired through M&A transfer always come 
with "the entire network"?


>   At the time of acquisition, the network is still behaving according to its reputation and what is done will cause necessary modifications to that reputation as time goes by.

Yes. Perhaps immediately, as the new owners are of course entirely 
different people with likely different motivations. The network might 
immediately have vastly different traffic patterns. Etc.

>
> On the other hand, I can see tremendous potential for mischief when acquiring an AS Number on the open market without having to take on the operation of said network as part of the package.

No different than the current situation. You simply make more money for 
the lawyers when you require that it use the M&A transfer process.

>
> I think these are very different scenarios.
>
> Again, I think we're seeing enough problems created by allowing transfers with IPv4 addresses

Really? What problems are those? From where I sit, I've seen none.

And are those any different than the problems that already existed with 
transfers of IPv4 addresses via M&A transfer?

Matthew Kaufman