transfer policy

[Kim Hubbard]

Jason,

While I understand your reasoning below, I am concerned that we will give
the perception of not treating organizations equally.  Do you think it's
fair to have one set of rules for those orgs that ARIN knows and a different
set for those we don't?

Kim

----- Original Message -----
From: jredisch <jredisch at virtela.com>
To: <policy at arin.net>
Sent: Tuesday, May 16, 2000 11:53 PM
Subject: RE: transfer policy


> Danny and All,
> Pre merger there is a quiet period where the two sides are not allowed to
> share engineering information.   The transfer of space may be a high
> priority to the company to show they are 'just one company now'.  A
transfer
> request may go in before all of the info below is known and certainly
before
> major engineering decisions are made about how to merge the two networks.
> If we allow the transfer to happen day one with proof of merger, we give
the
> two companies more time to gather this info and they can interface with
ARIN
> the next time they need space.   I see no reason to take up engineering
> resources on both sides twice in a period of less than three months.  This
> makes life more difficult for all involved.  As a member of the ARIN
> community I trust two ISP's with a history with ARIN to justify the space
> from the merger at the next time they go in to request IP space for the
now
> primary maintainer ID.
>
> Simultaneously, while putting ISP to ISP transfers with history in a
> different classification I would be in favor of dedicating the saved
> resources on the ARIN side to looking at the other transfers closer to
make
> sure they are legitimate.
>
> -Jason
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: policy-request at arin.net [mailto:policy-request at arin.net]On Behalf
> Of Danny McPherson
> Sent: Monday, May 15, 2000 7:27 AM
> To: policy at arin.net
> Subject: Re: transfer policy
>
>
>
>
> > Well, one reason we ask for utilization of the addresses is so that if
> it's
> > not being utilized efficiently (or at all which is true in some cases)
we
> > can ask for it to be returned or traded for a smaller block.  There have
> > been quite a few cases where a /16 was transfered with a network
> consisting
> > of 300 hosts.  We always try to talk the organization into getting a
> > smaller block but we don't have the authority right now to demand they
do
> so.
>
> This certainly makes sense.
>
> > It's also important that we know the organization that's receiving the
> > addresses knows exactly what they have.  With all of the consolidation
> > going on it's clear that a lot of organizations don't even know what
> > they're buying.  They have no idea how addresses are being utilized in
> some
> > cases so by asking for utilization it helps everyone in the long run.
>
> And this was my initial point.
>
> -danny
>
>