On Jun 3, 2015, at 11:29 PM, David Conrad <[email protected]> wrote: >> >> Is it correct to say that you simply feel registry should always be updated >> if address >> holder wishes (and even if they disregard policy, fail to enter an agreement >> pay the >> transfer fee, etc?) >> >> Or are you saying that we should deny such transfers, but if somehow >> effectively >> ‘possession’ of the address block moves to another party despite lack of >> transfer, >> that the registry has to eventually reflect reality? > > I'm not sure I see the the distinction you're making between the two. My > opinion on whether ARIN should deny (presumably out of policy) transfers is > not particularly relevant. Ignoring that, my answer to both would be 'yes’.
Understood. Given you have proposed that the registry “accuracy” be measured
via
fidelity to operational control of an address block, and that furthermore ARIN
has a
responsibility to this definition of accuracy, I need to ask some further
questions to
better understand this measure and its implications to the registry -
1) Should we update the entry for those cases where there is a party with
effective
‘possession’ (i.e. use) of an address block but the original address holder
cannot
be contacted or found? This is not uncommon for address blocks where the
original address holder is long gone and there’s a party with operational
control/use
of the address block who is asserting to be the rightful address holder.
2) Similarly, should we update the entry when a party has been using an address
block
for some time, and is still actively using it, but there is a dispute
about the meaning
of paperwork between the party and present address holder in the registry?
This
also quite common, particularly with bill of sale documents that are
ambiguous and
being presented to the registry in documenting an asserted ‘sale’ of
rights.
3) We presently have some practices regarding what documentation we require when
a party asserts to now have the rights to IP address block via
merger/acquisition
You can see specifics here
-<https://www.arin.net/resources/transfers/index.html
<https://www.arin.net/resources/transfers/index.html>>
May we waive the documentation requirements if the party who asserts such
can
demonstrate that they have operational control of the IP address block?
Once I have solid understanding of your accuracy model, it will be possible to
understand
what changes in mission/agreements/etc would be necessary if the community
wished
to move in that direction. It appears to represent a significant shift from
tracking the legal
rights to address blocks in the registry that we presently perform.
Thanks!
/John
John Curran
President and CEO
ARIN
signature.asc
Description: Message signed with OpenPGP using GPGMail
_______________________________________________ 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.
