[arin-ppml] 8.2 Transfers at ARIN
David.Huberman at microsoft.com
Tue Dec 10 10:31:04 EST 2013
So what if the policy/process resulted in 8.2 requests being something like:
- submit request form
- attach letter from attorney currently admitted to a bar indicating the transfer request is bona fide
That's how it's done in business when assuming contracts, right? An attorney sends a letter to the vendor stating that we are assuming the contract rights (in this case the RSA) so work with us on that.
Just an idea - thinking out loud of ways to make 8.2s fast and easy.
 That may be a U.S.-centric concept. How does this work in Canada in various Caribbean nations?
David R Huberman
Senior IT/OPS Program Manager (GFS)
From: Owen DeLong <owen at delong.com>
Sent: Tuesday, December 10, 2013 6:56 AM
To: David Huberman
Cc: arin-ppml at arin.net
Subject: Re: [arin-ppml] 8.2 Transfers at ARIN
If I were the allegedly acquired party and ARIN transferred my resources based solely on
the statement of some $LARGE_CONVICTED_FELON_SOFTWARE_HOUSE officer, I’d be
very upset if I hadn’t actually been acquired.
I’m not saying that your company was attempting any wrong-doing in this case, but I will say that a
document from an officer of the company which allegedly acquired the other company
really shouldn’t be sufficient and I think that ARIN’s actions were absolutely correct if you
didn’t have something more independent, like a bill of sale, court documents, or documents
signed by officers of the acquired entity.
On Dec 10, 2013, at 4:04 AM, David Huberman <David.Huberman at microsoft.com> wrote:
> In the context of an 8.2 transfer request discussion, John Curran posted:
>> To elaborate a bit, it's important to remember that in the circumstances where someone
>> is attempting to hijack resources (which looks quite similar to those attempting to
>> update resource records but unable or unwilling to provide supporting documentation),
>> there's another party that could be potentially harmed if ARIN does not take reasonable
>> and proper care in processing the request.
> Without question, and ARIN's many years of anti-fraud efforts and organization-wide
> commitment to fighting these scammers deserve a standing ovation. Leslie and her team
> have fought the good fight for years, and have prevented and stopped huge amounts of
> fraud. Thank you Leslie and ARIN!!
> But there has to be a better way for the 95%+ of requestors who ARE telling the truth;
> whose asserted transactions (company A merged into company B) really did happen, and
> they just want to update Whois records. To give a real-world example of the kinds of things
> I'm talking about ...
> I work for a public corporation. I cleaned up some of our records this fall. (I'm still working
> on it, actually.) For one M&A transaction, I provided a signed, notarized Secretary Statement
> from a high-ranking Officer of my corporation stating unequivocally that the Corporation owns
> all the assets of the former entity. That letter was rejected as insufficient.
> I can deal with that rejection, as I'm a full-time IPAM person. But the same response is given
> to small shops where the requestor is also the sole network engineer, and performing all ops
> functions, and probably all in-house IT, too. And those processes are way too much for the
> little guy, in my experience. And that's why I'm here.
> I'm not trying to pick on anyone with that example. I've stated very clearly in this thread that it's
> a combination of POLICY and procedure which I believe is standing in the way of 90+%
> approval and completion rates (where the only requests not approved are the ones where
> the requestor is being lazy and doesn't respond to simple queries, and requests that are
> submitted in bad faith). But the example is apt, I believe. The process is much too onerous
> for the 95% of 8.2 requestors who are acting in good faith, in my opinion.
> I'd like to introduce policy language which prompts staff review of transfers which will, in
> many cases, require no submission of legal documentation by the requestor where possible.
> I don't know what the language looks like, but I'm actively thinking it through. It would
> really help if this dialogue was responded to, and continued, with more than just the
> regular commenting crew. If you're a network operator, a broker, or anyone with a vested
> interest in helping ARIN get better, please jump in and let's discuss options for helping our RIR
> reach new heights to help the operator community!
> David R Huberman
> Microsoft Corporation
> Senior IT/OPS Program Manager (GFS)
> 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