transfer policy

[jredisch]

All,
	 The problem I see is that entities with no history are running through a
transfer process that needs to be tightened overall.  This will have a cost
impact in time and resources on both the 'customers' of ARIN and on ARIN
resources.  I would much rather see the ARIN resources dedicated to
preventing actions being taken by groups that may never deal with ARIN again
vs. entities that I trust.  I am defining 'trust' as someone who will have
to come back in the next few months anyway.  This can be documented and
built into a policy.  We have different fees and policies for ISP's vs. end
users anyway so I do not think this change is any more unequal.  It is based
on the fact that while all people who deal with ARIN have similar needs in
that they require IP addresses, there are in fact a very diverse group of
entities in the memebrship.  It is fair to treat the organizations
differently time wise as long as they all have to meet the same criteria in
the end in my opinion.

-Jason

-----Original Message-----
From: policy-request at arin.net [mailto:policy-request at arin.net]On Behalf
Of Kim Hubbard
Sent: Tuesday, May 16, 2000 8:14 AM
To: jredisch at virtela.com; policy at arin.net
Subject: Re: transfer policy


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
>
>