[arin-ppml] REVISED: Draft Policy ARIN-2012-8: Aligning 8.2 and 8.3 Transfer Policy

Owen DeLong owen at delong.com
Mon Nov 19 23:39:05 EST 2012

On Nov 19, 2012, at 7:56 PM, Jimmy Hess <mysidia at gmail.com> wrote:

> On 11/19/12, Owen DeLong <owen at delong.com> wrote:
>> IOW, I want to avoid extending the more lenient 8.2 provisions to a sale
>> where someone buys $100,000 worth of IP addresses and $20,000 worth of
>> hardware and then sells the hardware to $SCRAP_DEALER just to keep the
>> addresses.
> IP addresses don't belong to hardware;  IP addresses belong to IP
> interfaces, attached to hardware, in order to provide connectivity to
> a network node for communicating or offering a service.     A change
> of hardware does not imply that the need for the logical IP interface
> goes away.     If you send a router to a scrap dealer, that doesn't
> mean all the networks it routed necessarily go away.

The above statement was short-hand to explain my intent, not an absolute
statement implying that addresses were attached directly to hardware.
Put it back in context with what I was responding to.

> What about cases, where the acquiring organization finds the hardware
> _belongs_ with  $TRASH_COLLECTION or $SCRAP_DEALER    due to the
> obsolescence of said decrepit hardware,   and after acquiring,  they
> will make a non-disruptive reallocation of the hardware used to
> provide IT services?      Probably by re-consolidating on new
> hardware.

The policy language I proposed would not preclude this.

> That kind of restructuring does not make renumbering reasonable
> and doesn't belong under 8.3.

Agreed. However, I want to make sure that 8.2 does not get abused to
back-door 8.3 style transfers by adding hardware to the mix and pretending
it is an acquisition of a working network.


More information about the ARIN-PPML mailing list