[arin-ppml] REVISED: Draft Policy ARIN-2012-8: Aligning 8.2 and 8.3 Transfer Policy
cgrundemann at gmail.com
Mon Nov 26 16:25:54 EST 2012
I made some updates based on feedback received here, the new text is as follows:
Replace the first paragraph of section 8.2 with the following (second
paragraph remains unchanged):
ARIN will consider requests for the transfer of number resources in
the case of mergers and acquisitions under the following conditions:
* The new entity must provide evidence that they have acquired assets
that use the resources transferred from the current registrant. ARIN
will maintain an up-to-date list of acceptable types of documentation.
* The current registrant must not be involved in any dispute as to the
status of the transferred resources.
* The new entity must sign an RSA covering all transferred resources.
* The transferred resources will be subject to ARIN policies.
* The minimum transfer size is the smaller of the original allocation
size or the applicable minimum allocation size in current policy.
On Mon, Nov 19, 2012 at 9:39 PM, Owen DeLong <owen at delong.com> wrote:
> 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
>> 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
> 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.
> 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:
> Please contact info at arin.net if you experience any issues.
More information about the ARIN-PPML