[arin-ppml] Draft Policy ARIN-2014-9: Resolve Conflict Between RSA and 8.2 Utilization Requirements

[David Huberman]

Hello McTim,

It is in both agreements: 
	Paragraph 6. of the RSA 
	Paragraph 7. of the LRSA.

As to your other comment, I think our policy is failing the Registry's users, not the other way around :)

David R Huberman
Microsoft Corporation
Senior IT/OPS Program Manager (GFS)

-----Original Message-----
From: McTim [mailto:dogwallah at gmail.com] 
Sent: Thursday, March 20, 2014 2:00 PM
To: David Huberman
Cc: Owen DeLong; Heather Schiller; arin-ppml at arin.net
Subject: Re: [arin-ppml] Draft Policy ARIN-2014-9: Resolve Conflict Between RSA and 8.2 Utilization Requirements

Hi David,

On Thu, Mar 20, 2014 at 4:48 PM, David Huberman <David.Huberman at microsoft.com> wrote:
> In contrast to my friend Owen, not only do I believe there is a very 
> serious issue, but I believe this proposal is necessary for ARIN to 
> have any hope of being relevant in the years to come. I don't mean to 
> use that kind of hyperbole, but the issue is very real from my viewpoint.  Allow me to explain.
>
> There are two different problems which this policy proposal solves.
>
> 1. Whois accuracy
> =============
>
> As an ARIN Hostmaster for 10 years, I saw a very high rate of 
> legitimate transfers which were abandoned by the requestor.  In turn, 
> Whois did not get updated, and in most cases, remains out of date today.
>
> Think about that for a moment please:  legitimate M&A activity 
> occurred, but Whois never got updated.  That's a failure of the system. Why does it fail?
>
> The common scenario is straight forward:
>
>         1. Company A buys company B.
>         2. Company A submits a transfer request to ARIN to have the IP address and AS number
>         registrations reflect that Company A is now the registrant.
>         3. ARIN starts asking questions about the utilization of the number resources.
>         4. Company A walks away from the transfer and never returns.
>
> Step 3 is the consistent problem.  In many cases, Company A never even 
> submits the transfer request because they are scared off by step 3.

Then this is our (ARIN Community) problem isn't it, not the policy itself!!


<snip>



>
> Now to the second problem.
>
>
> 2. Conflict with the RSA:
> ==================
>
> John Curran can give a more accurate and nuanced history, but as best 
> I can recall, ARIN tried to bring more legacy registration holders 
> into the registry system by offering a Legacy Registration Services 
> Agreement.  One of the takeaways from that initial effort was that 
> legacy registration holders were unwilling to sign any agreement which technically allowed ARIN to de-register address space that they had without their consent.
>
> One of the concessions made over time was language in the RSA 
> documents which removed that concern; it prohibits ARIN from forcibly 
> taking away space when the signer is in compliance with the other terms and conditions of the contract.

is this in the LSRA only, or in all RSAs??

--
Cheers,

McTim
"A name indicates what we seek. An address indicates where it is. A route indicates how we get there."  Jon Postel