On Mon, May 5, 2014 at 5:48 PM, Scott Leibrand <[email protected]> wrote: > Bill Herrin makes a good point: many of the ideas we've been discussing in > the context of 2014-2 are really a more general relaxation of transfer > policies, and probably should be considered separately. However, I think > that statement (#2 above) represents something pretty close to the consensus > I heard in Chicago. Given that it also addresses the 2014-2 problem > statement, I think that might be the direction we need to be going here. > Thoughts?
Hi Scott, That defeats the anti-flipping provisions entirely. It costs all of a couple hundred dollars ($2000 if you jump through -all- the hoops) to create a subsidiary. It's trivial. You then sell the subsidiary replete with addresses. The buyer doesn't even have to register separately with the RIR. $10 domain name for the POC and google voice account included. Worse, as implemented in this proposal it creates an unfair bias favoring out-migration of addresses since transfers to subsidiaries within the region are covered by a different policy. This policy proposal is biased against the domestic folks it is ARIN's core mission to serve! My view now is the same as it was in February: http://lists.arin.net/pipermail/arin-ppml/2014-February/027835.html "Loopholes = bad. Allow open transfers or don't, but please don't create loopholes for folks to abuse." Regards, Bill Herrin -- William D. Herrin ................ [email protected] [email protected] 3005 Crane Dr. ...................... Web: <http://bill.herrin.us/> Falls Church, VA 22042-3004 _______________________________________________ PPML You are receiving this message because you are subscribed to the ARIN Public Policy Mailing List ([email protected]). Unsubscribe or manage your mailing list subscription at: http://lists.arin.net/mailman/listinfo/arin-ppml Please contact [email protected] if you experience any issues.
