transfer policy

[Kim Hubbard]

At 07:59 AM 5/12/00 -0400, Sweeting, John wrote:
>Jason, 
>
>I see your point more clearly now but it really was advantageous for me to
>do this because both companies had beaucoup legacy address space that had
>never been justified but due to the transfer now had to be. 
>I could probably agree with you if both companies involved in a transfer
>owned nothing but ARIN justified address space that it could be a waste of
>time and resources to re-justify the space. I have no idea how many
>transfers today are in that category. My feeling is that this policy has
>helped to clean up some of the legacy address space issues that are out
>there.
>
>Kim, is there any statistics kept on this? or would any of your staff be
>able to make an educated swag? 

I'll look into it but I'm assuming most transfer requests involve at least
some legacy addresses.

Kim

>
>-----Original Message-----
>From: Jason Redisch [mailto:jredisch at virtela.com]
>Sent: Thursday, May 11, 2000 11:23 PM
>To: policy at arin.net
>Subject: RE: transfer policy 
>
>
>John,
>
>	Being able to distinguish known ISP to ISP transfers that both have
>an ARIN
>history vs. all other transfers has an advantage on its own by allowing ARIN
>to dedicate more resources to unknown transfers.
>
>	Other than that both MCI and C&W had already justified their address
>space
>to ARIN. During the transfer you had to show legal transfer and rejustify
>both ISP's address space even though both were already ARIN members.  You
>also had a history of coming back to ARIN for IP space so if the
>justification was not completed then it is not like you would disappear off
>the face of the Earth.   I see no reason why we as a community need to waste
>your resources and ARIN's re-justifying both of the address pools in a
>merger like the one you went through.
>
>	It is not a question of putting off something that needs to be
>justified.
>It is a question of spending time going through two justifications or just
>one.
>
>-Jason