[arin-ppml] FYI -- RIPE-605 Services to Legacy Internet Resource Holders

[Martin Hannigan]

I have a dumb question.

Does 605 mean addresses are now property? Or only in some regions?

Best,

Marty



On Wednesday, February 12, 2014, David Conrad <drc at virtualized.org> wrote:

> John,
>
> On Feb 12, 2014, at 1:13 PM, John Curran <jcurran at arin.net <javascript:;>>
> wrote:
> >> "The importance of maintaining accurate records in the ARIN database is
> recognized as ARIN's principal task."
> > Alas, your very clear formulation won't be very informative,
> > since the registry is accurate even after a denied transfer
>
> You appear to be assuming that if ARIN denies the transfer, the transfer
> doesn't occur.
>
> Do you really believe that?
>
> > Hence, my suggestion to make such a survey more specific with
> > respect to prioritization of needs-based transfers vs operational
> > usefulness of registry data.
>
>
> Again, for me, the issue isn't about needs-based transfer per se, it's
> more general than that.  Needs-based constraints on transfer in the context
> of legacy addresses is a post facto imposition of policy on resource
> holders who have no contractual obligation to abide by (or even knowledge
> of) that policy. Failure to accurately record a transfer between mutually
> agreeable parties does not necessarily result in that transfer not taking
> place but it does result in the database being degraded if the transfer
> does occur.  To me, this is a failure in the primary activity of an
> Internet registry. If anyone in ARIN community believes that as the IPv4
> free pool is exhausted that ARIN (the organization) will be able to stand
> in the way of the organizations most interested in obtaining address space
> and the folks that want to sell it to them, you have a different view of
> desperation than I do.
>
> Perhaps the right answer would be if ARIN renames itself to the American
> Policy Forum for Internet Numbers and the registry function (which, as I
> understand it takes a fraction of ARIN's budget) gets spun off into its own
> non-profit (501c(3) instead of c(6)) organization.
>
> And by the way, continuing to try to associate transfers between mutually
> agreeable parties as theft or illegal activity isn't really helping the
> conversation.
>
> Regards,
> -drc
>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://lists.arin.net/pipermail/arin-ppml/attachments/20140212/3f652077/attachment.htm>