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

David Farmer farmer at umn.edu
Fri Mar 21 18:51:05 EDT 2014

On 3/21/14, 09:10 , Gary Buhrmaster wrote:
> <soapbox>
> Any M&A, or organization changes, have a cost
> regarding business records, and it is incumbent
> on the organization to be prepared to pay that cost
> for changes.  Updating ARIN records (and the cost
> of doing so) is no different, and should not have a
> special "out" just because it can be take time or
> the people involved did/do not want to invest that
> effort.  The days of informal handshake number
> deals are (or should be) long over.  Get over it, and
> do the (boring, painful, but necessary) work.
> </soapbox>

I very much agree, there is and almost certainly should be work involved.

So, yes with any M&A, or other organization change, you should have to 
the "Business Office" part of documenting business records associated 
with the change.  The rationale for this "Business Office" part is 
clear.  Its necessary to prevent fraudulent changes to resources, and 
ARIN has a clear fiduciary responsibility to ensure this happens 

However, I do think it is a reasonable question to ask, should you also 
have to do the "technical" documentation that the paragraph in question 
requires as well?  Frequently, such an organizational change implies 
little to no technical change.  So, what is the rational for doing this 
"technical" reporting?  Let me be clear, I'm not saying there isn't a 
valid rationale, but I personally can't articulate it.  So, I'd 
appreciate it if someone would articulate a valid rationale for this 
"technical" reporting.


David Farmer               Email: farmer at umn.edu
Office of Information Technology
University of Minnesota
2218 University Ave SE     Phone: 1-612-626-0815
Minneapolis, MN 55414-3029  Cell: 1-612-812-9952

More information about the ARIN-PPML mailing list