[arin-ppml] ARIN-PPML 2015-2

[John Curran]

On May 31, 2015, at 10:13 PM, Matthew Kaufman <matthew at matthew.at> wrote:
> 
> On 5/31/2015 6:10 PM, Owen DeLong wrote:
>> As stated… The concern is the potential for A->B->Money lather, rinse, repeat.
> 
> Please explain why this matters one bit after ARIN no longer has a free pool from which the addresses might be coming.

An excellent question for the community carefully consider as we move into a post free-pool 
depletion era.   (In fact, for comparison sake, it could be helpful to consider what transfer 
policies would be desired in a world in which all of the IPv4 address space had been initially 
and 100% pre-allocated, and only now transfer policies were now being considered to extend 
the useful life of the system…  it’s quite possible that the result would not bear any resemblance
to our current allocation-based transfer policies.)

> I will note that there's really no stopping addresses from being used anywhere by anyone…

That is correct; the transfers are of rights applicable to specific address blocks in the 
Internet Numbers Registry system - contrary to the assertions of some, these are not
rights to be in anyone’s routers or in the routing table, etc.

> all we're talking about is whether or not ARIN will be recording this in their database.

That’s an interesting postulate; I’ll observe that the rights are to address blocks in the 
registry and that makes it rather challenging to assert any rights to the address blocks 
unless those rights were transferred in accordance with registry policy, i.e. this is not
a recording issue - a transfer in accordance with policy transfers specific rights for 
specific entries in the Internet numbers registry system to the recipient, an attempted
transfer which doesn’t meet policy doesn’t transfer those rights, and it is quite unclear
what, if anything, an asserted recipient is actually receiving.

Thanks,
/John

John Curran
President and CEO
ARIN