> On Oct 5, 2015, at 16:40, John Curran <[email protected]> wrote: > >> On Oct 5, 2015, at 4:07 PM, Martin Hannigan <[email protected]> wrote: >> >> Let me give you a real world example. >> >> 1. Buy rights to use addresses in any quantity you believe you need >> 2. Use those addresses as you need them, assuming the agreement you made >> with the party works properly >> 3. Get an LOA from the documented owner >> 4. Bypass ARIN entirely >> 5. Use the addresses. >> >> How do you think we should solve that problem? > > > It is not my job to determine whether the example above is a major problem > (or not) - > that’s for the community to assess, but I do want to highlight some aspects > that result > from situations (such as the one described above) of which everyone on the > list might > not be aware - > > 1) While the network operations confusion that can result is fairly well > understood to > those on this list, what may not be apparently is that there are others > who rely upon > the registry (e.g. researchers, anti-spam folks, law enforcement, etc.) > and for whom > address blocks being used as described above results in real impacts to > their ability > to rely upon the registry, and thus accomplish their job. > > 2) Because the “documented owner” doesn’t ever update the registry, a number > of > creative schemes are possible whereby the documented owner gets paid from > multiple parties for the same rights and then effectively disappears with > their > proceeds leaving the individual buyers to fight it out. There are ways to > reduce > this risk (e.g. escrow arrangements, guarantees with adequate backing, > etc.) > but the need for these (and probability of circumvention) goes up > dramatically > absent an updated registry. Likewise for the case where the “documented > owner” doesn’t actually have a documentation trail that would support > their > ability to sell the rights to even one party, but that is not uncovered > since the > documentation never gets reviewed by the registry. > > I have not seen a clear expression of these cases on the list, and felt it > important > to describe them for those who may not have first hand involvement. It is > true that > under 2015-7, parties would be able to obtain more address space then > presently > allowed and to so do based upon an officer representation, so the risks that > such > a change would bring about should be carefully weighted by the community > against > the situations outlined above which exist under the status quo. > >
Sounds like focused and friendly registry accuracy policy might work better? Best, Marty _______________________________________________ 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.
