[arin-ppml] A Redefinition of IPv4 Need post ARIN run-out (was:Re:Against 2013-4)

William Herrin bill at herrin.us
Wed Jun 12 13:23:58 EDT 2013

On Wed, Jun 12, 2013 at 1:12 PM, Brandon Ross <bross at pobox.com> wrote:
> On Wed, 12 Jun 2013, William Herrin wrote:
>> That poses a practical problem. When is a legal entity linked? Even
>> the courts struggle with determining whether one legal entity is
>> operating under control of another, and that's after subpoenas,
>> discovery and comparable activities that you propose ARIN not be
>> allowed to evaluate for small transfers.
> How is this a problem unique to the non-needs based, small transfer
> proposal?  Doesn't this exact problem still exist when you do a needs
> assessment?

Hi Brandon,

Nope. With a needs assessment in place, we have no cause to care what
scope the organization uses to define itself. Only activity within
that scope can be used to justify need. Reporting the same instance of
need under multiple organizations is fraud.

If the shell's use is justified in and of itself, what difference does
it make that the shell holds the addresses instead of the parent?

Bill Herrin

William D. Herrin ................ herrin at dirtside.com  bill at herrin.us
3005 Crane Dr. ...................... Web: <http://bill.herrin.us/>
Falls Church, VA 22042-3004

More information about the ARIN-PPML mailing list