[arin-ppml] DRAFT POLICY 2012-3: ASN TRANSFERS

[Jeffrey Lyon]

On Fri, Mar 30, 2012 at 11:41 AM, JOSHUA SNOWHORN <snowhorn at gmail.com> wrote:
>
> On Mar 30, 2012, at 10:31 AM, John Santos wrote:
>
>> On Fri, 30 Mar 2012, JOSHUA SNOWHORN wrote:
>>
>>> in support of 2012-3.
>>>
>>
>>> The current process via only M&A or Bankruptcy, forces entities to
>>> troll for cheap assets or failed companies to acquire an AS that is
>>> viewed as favorable. Simply stating a policy to facilitate simple
>>> transfers removes the hassle for the few who would do
>>> such a transaction and frankly clarifies a market for unused assets.
>>>
>>
>> False dichotomy.  They have a 3rd option, applying for and receiving a
>> new AS directly from ARIN.
>
> Yes…always available to anyone who qualifies…and a high number AS is just as good as a low number AS.
>
>>
>> Why should any number be viewed as favorably or unfavorably?  Unless it
>> is a very rare special number attached to superstition (7, 13 and 666
>> are the only 3 examples I can think of), you must be refering to the
>> reputation attached to an AS by the business reputation of its former
>> holder.  Rather than inducing clarity, attempting to confuse people by
>> trading on the reputation of the current or former holder without
>> acquiring the network, assets, customers or anything else that reputation
>> was built on, smacks of deception.
>
> Regardless of any one individuals superstition or ideas, the fact remains that people like to have lower AS numbers and do feel it somehow represents credibility. Your assumption of the reputation of the previous holder however I do not think brings any bearing to this argument. I think it is just the "old school" credibility of that low AS that matters….not the previous owners good or bad reputation which is evidenced by the renaming in whole, generally, of the handles associated with that AS.
>
>>
>>
>>> Spend some time digging AS by AS and you will find by far and away too
>>> many unused ASN's that in some cases have sat there for decades. I cannot
>>> imagine any of us would condone leaving such a limited 2bit
>>
>> 32bit?  There is no current or impending shortage of 32bit ASNs.
>
> mea culpa…yes meant 32bit. And yes no shortage…but certainly dead wasted AS's abound…why waste when others want.
>
>>
>>>  ...  asset class as
>>> dead in the water because we did not support a written transfer process.
>>>
>>> Removal of ambiguity is the goal here, from everything I read on the
>>> proposed policy change, and that is a good thing.
>>
>> This proposal will increase ambiguity, not remove it.
>
> How is that? It is defining a process which does not exist today giving ARIN the ability to manage something properly without throwing up their hands and saying sorry but we can't...
>
>>
>>>
>>> Cheers,
>>>
>>> Josh Snowhorn
>>
>> --
>> John Santos
>> Evans Griffiths & Hart, Inc.
>> 781-861-0670 ext 539
>>
>
> Josh
> _______________________________________________
> 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.

I disagree that continually adding more bits as decades pass is the
solution to all resource shortages. Regardless of whether we have 2,
4, 8, etc bits we should have policies in effect which allow for more
efficient use (eg. transfers).

My two cents.

-- 
Jeffrey Lyon, Leadership Team
jeffrey.lyon at blacklotus.net | http://www.blacklotus.net
Black Lotus Communications - AS32421
First and Leading in DDoS Protection Solutions