[arin-ppml] 8.2 Transfers at ARIN
owen at delong.com
Tue Dec 10 10:52:58 EST 2013
Given that ARIN operates beyond the US borders, I’m not sure that being admitted to a bar is a sufficiently high bar.
 Permitted to practice law in a court of competent jurisdiction. I believe this works in the US and Canada. Not sure about elsewhere.
 A metric or standard against which something is measured.
On Dec 10, 2013, at 7:31 AM, David Huberman <David.Huberman at microsoft.com> wrote:
> 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
> Microsoft Corporation
> 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.
> 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