[arin-ppml] Recommended Draft Policy ARIN 2015-2 Modify 8.4 (Inter-RIR Transfers to Specified Recipients)

Wed Jun 1 11:02:21 EDT 2016

Really?

I can move any IP equal to or larger than the minimum between ARIN OrgIDs
as long as
the entities registered to the OrgID have either the source or recipient
entity owning or
controling the other, or both are under common ownership or control?

Even without a corporate reorganization?

Staff, is this true?

(I am happy to read 8.2 that way, but that is not how I currently read it.)

__Jason

On Wed, Jun 1, 2016 at 9:44 AM, David Huberman <daveid at panix.com> wrote:

> Ah, in this case 8.2 applies.  Number resources which need to move between
> OrgIDs with common ownership can move via 8.2. :-)
>
> On Jun 1, 2016, at 8:39 AM, Jason Schiller <jschiller at google.com> wrote:
>
> My understanding of the problem is that company A is selling a /16.
> Company B buys the /16.
>
> After 3 months, company B finds their projected usage of the IP space
> is no longer needed because their product was canceled, but a
> European division of company B has need of them.
>
> Under current policy company B cannot transfer the address space
> to their european division because:
>
> 1. the source is ineligible for another 9 months because they recently
> received a transfer.
>
> 2. the recipient is ineligible because RIPE does not have a compatible
> needs based policy (maybe this has changed).
>
> This policy would permit the transfer.
>
> Now instead imagine company B has multiple OrgIDs, one for dial-up,
> one for dedicated customers, etc.  They recently decided to have a
> cloud offering, and spun up a new OrgID (under the same legal entity)
> and transfered the /16 for their new cloud offering.
>
> The cloud product fizzles after 3 months, but there is justified need for
> the /16 in part by the dial-up customers and in part by dedicated
> customers.  To properly reflect the usage of the space part of the /16
> needs to be moved to the dial-up OrgID, and the rest to the dedicated
> OrgId.
>
> Same scenario, but instead of one company with multiple OrgIds, it is
> one company with multiple wholly owned subsidiaries, each of which
> have their own OrgID.
>
> I believe 8.2 does not apply unless there was some corporate
> restructuring.
>
> ___Jason
>
> On Wed, Jun 1, 2016 at 9:04 AM, David Huberman <daveid at panix.com> wrote:
>
>> What real scenario are you thinking of that involves in-region companies
>> that isn't an 8.3?  I'm an American and my familiarity with American
>> corporate law and resulting structures is having a hard time thinking of a
>> scenario.  But maybe it's just early and I haven't had my hot chocolate yet
>> :)
>>
>>
>>
>> On Jun 1, 2016, at 7:42 AM, Jason Schiller <jschiller at google.com> wrote:
>>
>> I support as written.
>>
>> However it occurs to me, why doesn't this text also apply to 8.3
>> intra-ARIN specified transfers?
>>
>> 1. I see no reason why intra-compnay transfers where the recipient is
>> outside of the ARIN region, be treated any differently than when the
>> recipient is inside the ARIN region.
>>
>> 2. In fact I think if anything we would want to be equally or more
>> liberal when the recipient is inside the ARIN region to have a greater
>> chance of enforcing anti-flip restrictions (which we cannot easily do
>> outside of the region).
>>
>> 3. I would like to avoid further diverging 8.3 and 8.4.  One could
>> imagine merging 8.3 and 8.4 into a single section, and the community has
>> asked the AC to undertake that work.
>>
>> ___Jason
>>
>> On Tue, May 24, 2016 at 5:23 PM, ARIN <info at arin.net> wrote:
>>
>>>
>>> Recommended Draft Policy ARIN-2015-2 Modify 8.4 (Inter-RIR Transfers to
>>> Specified Recipients)
>>>
>>> On 19 May 2016 the ARIN Advisory Council (AC) advanced 2015-2 to
>>> Recommended Draft Policy status.
>>>
>>> The text of the Recommended Draft Policy is below, and may also be found
>>> at:
>>> https://www.arin.net/policy/proposals/2015_2.html
>>>
>>> You are encouraged to discuss all Recommended Draft Policies on PPML
>>> prior to their presentation at the next ARIN Public Policy Consultation
>>> (PPC). PPML and PPC discussions are invaluable to the AC when determining
>>> community consensus.
>>>
>>> The PDP can be found at:
>>> https://www.arin.net/policy/pdp.html
>>>
>>> Draft Policies and Proposals under discussion can be found at:
>>> https://www.arin.net/policy/proposals/index.html
>>>
>>> Regards,
>>>
>>> Communications and Member Services
>>> American Registry for Internet Numbers (ARIN)
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> Recommended Draft Policy ARIN 2015-2
>>> Modify 8.4 (Inter-RIR Transfers to Specified Recipients)
>>>
>>> Date: 24 May 2016
>>>
>>> AC's assessment of conformance with the Principles of Internet Number
>>> Resource Policy:
>>>
>>> Draft Policy ARIN 2015-2 contributes to fair and impartial number
>>> resources administration by removing an impediment to the transfer of IPv4
>>> numbering resources to other RIRs when business needs change within the
>>> first 12 months of receipt of a 24 month supply of IP addresses by an
>>> entity via the transfer market. It is technically sound in that it balances
>>> removing limits on transfers of IPv4 numbering resources to other RIRs with
>>> safeguards related to ownership and control described in the draft policy
>>> to reduce the likelihood of fraudulent transactions. There was strong
>>> community support for this draft policy at the NANOG 66 PPC and ARIN 37,
>>> subject only to some suggested editorial changes which have now been
>>> implemented in the latest version.
>>>
>>> Problem Statement:
>>>
>>> Organizations that obtain a 24 month supply of IP addresses via the
>>> transfer market and then have an unexpected change in business plan are
>>> unable to move IP addresses to the proper RIR within the first 12 months of
>>> receipt.
>>>
>>> Policy statement:
>>>
>>> Replace 8.4, bullet 4, to read:
>>>
>>> "Source entities within the ARIN region must not have received a
>>> transfer, allocation, or assignment of IPv4 number resources from ARIN for
>>> the 12 months prior to the approval of a transfer request, unless either
>>> the source or recipient entity owns or controls the other, or both are
>>> under common ownership or control. This restriction does not include M&A
>>> transfers."
>>>
>>> Comments: Organizations that obtain a 24 month supply of IP addresses
>>> via the transfer market and then have an unexpected change in business plan
>>> are unable to move IP addresses to the proper RIR within the first 12
>>> months of receipt. The need to move the resources does not flow from ARIN
>>> policy, but rather from the requirement of certain registries outside the
>>> ARIN region to have the resources moved in order to be used there.
>>>
>>> The intention of this change is to allow organizations to perform
>>> inter-RIR transfers of space received via an 8.3 transfer regardless of the
>>> date transferred to ARIN. A common example is that an organization acquires
>>> a block located in the ARIN region, transfers it to ARIN, then 3 months
>>> later, the organization announces that it wants to launch new services out
>>> of region. Under current policy, the organization is prohibited from moving
>>> some or all of those addresses to that region's Whois if there is a need to
>>> move them to satisfy the rules of the other region requiring the movement
>>> of the resources to that region in order for them to be used there.
>>> Instead, the numbers are locked in ARIN's Whois. It's important to note
>>> that 8.3 transfers are approved for a 24 month supply, and it would not be
>>> unheard of for a business model to change within the first 12 months after
>>> approval. The proposal also introduces a requirement for an affiliation
>>> relationship between the source and recipient entity, based on established
>>> corporate law principles, so as to make it reasonably likely that
>>> eliminating the 12 month anti-flip period in that situation will meet the
>>> needs of organizations that operate networks in more than one region
>>> without encouraging abuse.
>>>
>>> a. Timetable for implementation: Immediate
>>>
>>> b. Anything else: N/A
>>>
>>> #####
>>>
>>> ARIN STAFF & LEGAL ASSESSMENT
>>> Draft Policy ARIN-2015-2
>>> MODIFY 8.4 (INTER-RIR TRANSFERS TO SPECIFIED RECIPIENTS)
>>> https://www.arin.net/policy/proposals/2015_2.html
>>>
>>> Date of Assessment: 17 May 2016
>>>
>>> ___
>>> 1. Summary (Staff Understanding)
>>>
>>> Currently, organizations are unable to act as a source on an 8.4
>>> transfer of IPv4 address space if they have received IPv4 address space in
>>> the past 12 months from ARIN's IPv4 free pool, the waiting list for unmet
>>> requests, or an 8.3 transfer. This draft policy lifts the 12-month
>>> restriction in cases when the source or recipient entity owns or controls
>>> the other, or both are under common ownership or control.
>>>
>>> ___
>>> 2. Comments
>>>
>>> A. ARIN Staff Comments
>>>
>>> * If this policy is implemented, ARIN staff would no longer apply a
>>> 12-month time restriction to organizations who wish to 8.4 transfer IPv4
>>> addresses to themselves or in cases when the source or recipient entity
>>> owns or controls the other, or both are under common ownership or control.
>>>
>>> * This policy could be implemented as written.
>>>
>>> B. ARIN General Counsel – Legal Assessment
>>>
>>> Concerns raised by the GC regarding previous versions of this policy
>>> have been satisfactorily addressed in the current draft. The current
>>> proposed draft does not create material legal issues for ARIN. In order to
>>> determine when entities are under common ownership or control, traditional
>>> legal standards will be applied by ARIN.
>>>
>>> ___
>>> 3. Resource Impact
>>>
>>> Implementation of this policy would have minimal resource impact. It is
>>> estimated that implementation would occur within 3 months after
>>> ratification by the ARIN Board of Trustees. The following would be needed
>>> in order to implement:
>>>
>>> * Updated guidelines and internal procedures
>>>
>>> * Staff training
>>>
>>> ___
>>> 4. Proposal / Draft Policy Text Assessed
>>>
>>> Draft Policy ARIN 2015-2
>>> Modify 8.4 (Inter-RIR Transfers to Specified Recipients)
>>>
>>> Date: 11 May 2016
>>>
>>> Problem Statement:
>>>
>>> Organizations that obtain a 24 month supply of IP addresses via the
>>> transfer market and then have an unexpected change in business plan are
>>> unable to move IP addresses to the proper RIR within the first 12 months of
>>> receipt.
>>>
>>> Policy statement:
>>>
>>> Replace 8.4, bullet 4, to read: "Source entities within the ARIN region
>>> must not have received a transfer, allocation, or assignment of IPv4 number
>>> resources from ARIN for the 12 months prior to the approval of a transfer
>>> request, unless either the source or recipient entity owns or controls the
>>> other, or both are under common ownership or control. This restriction does
>>> not include M&A transfers."
>>>
>>> Comments: Organizations that obtain a 24 month supply of IP addresses
>>> via the transfer market and then have an unexpected change in business plan
>>> are unable to move IP addresses to the proper RIR within the first 12
>>> months of receipt. The need to move the resources does not flow from ARIN
>>> policy, but rather from the requirement of certain registries outside the
>>> ARIN region to have the resources moved in order to be used there.
>>>
>>> The intention of this change is to allow organizations to perform
>>> inter-RIR transfers of space received via an 8.3 transfer regardless of the
>>> date transferred to ARIN. A common example is that an organization acquires
>>> a block located in the ARIN region, transfers it to ARIN, then 3 months
>>> later, the organization announces that it wants to launch new services out
>>> of region. Under current policy, the organization is prohibited from moving
>>> some or all of those addresses to that region's Whois if there is a need to
>>> move them to satisfy the rules of the other region requiring the movement
>>> of the resources to that region in order for them to be used there.
>>> Instead, the numbers are locked in ARIN's Whois. It's important to note
>>> that 8.3 transfers are approved for a 24 month supply, and it would not be
>>> unheard of for a business model to change within the first 12 months after
>>> approval. The proposal also introduces a requirement for an affiliation
>>> relationship between the source and recipient entity, based on established
>>> corporate law principles, so as to make it reasonably likely that
>>> eliminating the 12 month anti-flip period in that situation will meet the
>>> needs of organizations that operate networks in more than one region
>>> without encouraging abuse.
>>>
>>> a. Timetable for implementation: Immediate
>>> b. Anything else: N/A
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> PPML
>>> You are receiving this message because you are subscribed to
>>> the ARIN Public Policy Mailing List (ARIN-PPML at arin.net).
>>> Unsubscribe or manage your mailing list subscription at:
>>> http://lists.arin.net/mailman/listinfo/arin-ppml
>>> Please contact info at arin.net if you experience any issues.
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> --
>> _______________________________________________________
>> Jason Schiller|NetOps|jschiller at google.com|571-266-0006
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> PPML
>> You are receiving this message because you are subscribed to
>> the ARIN Public Policy Mailing List (ARIN-PPML at arin.net).
>> Unsubscribe or manage your mailing list subscription at:
>> http://lists.arin.net/mailman/listinfo/arin-ppml
>> Please contact info at arin.net if you experience any issues.
>>
>>
>
>
> --
> _______________________________________________________
> Jason Schiller|NetOps|jschiller at google.com|571-266-0006
>
>

-- 
_______________________________________________________
Jason Schiller|NetOps|jschiller at google.com|571-266-0006
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://lists.arin.net/pipermail/arin-ppml/attachments/20160601/e43a05fc/attachment.htm>