Re: [arin-ppml] 2016-9 Streamline Merger & Acquisition Transfers - Text modifications
+1 Dave’s comments. I support 2016-9. It should hopefully strengthen the accuracy of the whois data. -- Brian E Jones, CSM, CSPO NI Virginia Tech bjo...@vt.edu > On Jan 24, 2017, at 11:23 PM, David Farmer <far...@umn.edu> wrote: > > In the most general sense a state is a corporation. See; > https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Corporation#History > <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Corporation#History> Further, in most cases > the agencies of a state are not independent but sub-parts of the whole. > Therefore, moving resources between agencies should more properly be > considered a reorganization of a single entity, in most situations, and not a > transfer between separate entities. Also, I'd expect ARIN would provide some > level of deference to sovereign government entities like states, especially > in an interagency type situation. > > However, to protect itself, I would expect ARIN would want to ensure they are > dealing with someone with the proper authority to act on the state's behalf. > So, I could imagine ARIN asking a state (or agency) to provide evidence (such > as a quote of applicable statute) of who has authority over the agencies > and/or resources in question. I expect this would be especially be true, if > resources were being transferred out of a State's control. > > Thanks. > > On Tue, Jan 24, 2017 at 5:59 PM, Richard J. Letts <rjle...@uw.edu > <mailto:rjle...@uw.edu>> wrote: > This assumes that only corporate entities merge, acquire, or re-organize. How > would state agencies or an inter-institution research group produce the > required documentation to facilitate the movement of resources given the lack > of independently verifiable information? > > > > Similarly, a function might be transferred between state agencies, but we > might not be acquiring an entire corporate entity (as we’re a state agency). > > > > Richard > > > > From: ARIN-PPML <arin-ppml-boun...@arin.net > <mailto:arin-ppml-boun...@arin.net>> on behalf of John Springer > <3jo...@gmail.com <mailto:3jo...@gmail.com>> > Date: Tuesday, January 24, 2017 at 12:32 PM > To: "arin-ppml@arin.net <mailto:arin-ppml@arin.net>" <arin-ppml@arin.net > <mailto:arin-ppml@arin.net>> > Subject: [arin-ppml] 2016-9 Streamline Merger & Acquisition Transfers - Text > modifications > > > > These two changes will leave Section 8.2 looking like this: > > 8.2. Mergers and Acquisitions > > ARIN will consider requests for the transfer of number resources in the case > of mergers, acquisitions, and reorganizations under the following conditions: > > The current registrant must not be involved in any dispute as to the status > of the resources to be transferred. > > The new entity must sign an RSA covering all resources to be transferred. > > The resources to be transferred will be subject to ARIN policies. > > The minimum transfer size is the smaller of the original allocation size or > the applicable minimum allocation size in current policy. > > AND one or more of the following: > > The recipient must provide independently verifiable evidence that they have > acquired the assets that use the resources to be transferred from the current > registrant. > > OR > > The recipient must show that they have acquired the entire corporate entity > which is the current registrant. > > > > > ___ > PPML > You are receiving this message because you are subscribed to > the ARIN Public Policy Mailing List (ARIN-PPML@arin.net > <mailto:ARIN-PPML@arin.net>). > Unsubscribe or manage your mailing list subscription at: > http://lists.arin.net/mailman/listinfo/arin-ppml > <http://lists.arin.net/mailman/listinfo/arin-ppml> > Please contact i...@arin.net <mailto:i...@arin.net> if you experience any > issues. > > > > -- > === > David Farmer Email:far...@umn.edu > <mailto:email%3afar...@umn.edu> > Networking & Telecommunication Services > Office of Information Technology > University of Minnesota > 2218 University Ave SEPhone: 612-626-0815 > Minneapolis, MN 55414-3029 Cell: 612-812-9952 > === > ___ > PPML > You are receiving this message because you are subscribed to > the ARIN Public Policy Mailing List (ARIN-PPML@arin.net). > Unsubscribe or manage your mailing list subscription at: > http://lists.arin.net/mailman/listinfo/arin-ppml > Please contact i...@arin.net if you experience any issues. 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 (ARIN-PPML@arin.net). Unsubscribe or manage your mailing list subscription at: http://lists.arin.net/mailman/listinfo/arin-ppml Please contact i...@arin.net if you experience any issues.
Re: [arin-ppml] 2016-9 Streamline Merger & Acquisition Transfers - Text modifications
I support this draft. José On Tue, Jan 24, 2017 at 4:32 PM, John Springer <3jo...@gmail.com> wrote: > Greetings PPML, > > After discussions between the author, shepherds and the AC, the text of > ARIN Draft Policy 2016-9, Streamline Merger & Acquisition Transfers has > been modified for clarity. > > Please reply with thoughts and feedback. They will be very welcome. > Thank you in advance. > > New text: > > Problem Statement: > In the case of a merger or acquisition, current policy encourages not > updating registration data, thus leaving the number resource in the name of > a now defunct entity. > It is not uncommon for an entity which has bought another entity (with > existing number resources) to leave Organizational data (Whois) in the name > of the acquired company. The requirements in Section 8.2 put a > justification burden on the acquiring organization, which was a legitimate > protection while free pool assignments were available. It is worth > revisiting Section 8.2 and looking for opportunities to simplify the policy > in the interest of improving the registry data. > Consider the following: > 1. In the case where both organizations (acquirer, acquired) have > justified their existing number resources from an issuer (e.g. SRI-NIC, > GSI, ARIN) under the policies that were in force at the time of issuance, > the number resources have already been justified once. > 2. ARIN does not customarily require organizations holding address space > to document utilization except when they are asking ARIN to issue more > space. > 3. Section 8.2 M is not asking ARIN to issue more space or provide > authorization to acquire space in an 8.3 transfer. It is simply updating > ARIN's database to reflect the current reality, that being that control of > a company has changed. > Language that speaks of required return or transfer of space is of > questionable enforceability in the context of the current RSA (section 6, > "ARIN has no right to revoke any Included Number Resources under this > Agreement due to lack of utilization by Holder"). > Clauses that serve to scare organizations away from updating their > information are counter to the goal of good data in whois. > Policy should allow ARIN staff to concentrate finite resources on > ascertaining corporate chain of custody so as to minimize the chance of > fraudulent transfers rather than auditing space already issued. > Policy statement: > Delete the bullet point that reads: > For mergers and acquisition transfers, the recipient entity must provide > evidence that they have acquired assets that use the resources to be > transferred from the current registrant. ARIN will maintain an up-to-date > list of acceptable types of documentation. > Add this conditional to the bottom of 8.2 for linguistic clarity: > "AND one or more of the following: > The recipient must provide independently verifiable evidence that they > have acquired the assets that use the resources to be transferred from the > current registrant. > OR > The recipient must show that they have acquired the entire corporate > entity which is the current registrant." > Remove the following paragraph from Section 8.2 of the NRPM: > ARIN will proceed with processing transfer requests even if the number > resources of the combined organizations exceed what can be justified under > current ARIN policy. In that event, ARIN will work with the resource > holder(s) to transfer the extra number resources to other organization(s) > or accept a voluntary return of the extra number resources to ARIN. > These two changes will leave Section 8.2 looking like this: > 8.2. Mergers and Acquisitions > ARIN will consider requests for the transfer of number resources in the > case of mergers, acquisitions, and reorganizations under the following > conditions: > The current registrant must not be involved in any dispute as to the > status of the resources to be transferred. > The new entity must sign an RSA covering all resources to be transferred. > The resources to be transferred will be subject to ARIN policies. > The minimum transfer size is the smaller of the original allocation size > or the applicable minimum allocation size in current policy. > AND one or more of the following: > The recipient must provide independently verifiable evidence that they > have acquired the assets that use the resources to be transferred from the > current registrant. > OR > The recipient must show that they have acquired the entire corporate > entity which is the current registrant. > Timetable for implementation: Immediate > > Old text: > > Problem Statement: > It is not uncommon for an entity which has bought another entity (with > existing number resources) to leave Organizational data (Whois) in the name > of the acquired company. The requirements in Section 8.2 put a > justification burden on the acquiring organization, which was a legitimate > protection while free pool assignments were available. It is worth > revisiting Section
Re: [arin-ppml] 2016-9 Streamline Merger & Acquisition Transfers - Text modifications
Well said, David. Thank you. John Springer On Tue, Jan 24, 2017 at 8:23 PM, David Farmer <far...@umn.edu> wrote: > In the most general sense a state is a corporation. See; > https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Corporation#History Further, in most cases > the agencies of a state are not independent but sub-parts of the whole. > Therefore, moving resources between agencies should more properly be > considered a reorganization of a single entity, in most situations, and not > a transfer between separate entities. Also, I'd expect ARIN would provide > some level of deference to sovereign government entities like states, > especially in an interagency type situation. > > However, to protect itself, I would expect ARIN would want to ensure they > are dealing with someone with the proper authority to act on the state's > behalf. So, I could imagine ARIN asking a state (or agency) to provide > evidence (such as a quote of applicable statute) of who has authority over > the agencies and/or resources in question. I expect this would be > especially be true, if resources were being transferred out of a State's > control. > > Thanks. > > On Tue, Jan 24, 2017 at 5:59 PM, Richard J. Letts <rjle...@uw.edu> wrote: > >> This assumes that only corporate entities merge, acquire, or re-organize. >> How would state agencies or an inter-institution research group produce the >> required documentation to facilitate the movement of resources given the >> lack of independently verifiable information? >> >> >> >> Similarly, a function might be transferred between state agencies, but we >> might not be acquiring an entire corporate entity (as we’re a state agency). >> >> >> >> Richard >> >> >> >> *From: *ARIN-PPML <arin-ppml-boun...@arin.net> on behalf of John >> Springer <3jo...@gmail.com> >> *Date: *Tuesday, January 24, 2017 at 12:32 PM >> *To: *"arin-ppml@arin.net" <arin-ppml@arin.net> >> *Subject: *[arin-ppml] 2016-9 Streamline Merger & Acquisition Transfers >> - Text modifications >> >> >> >> These two changes will leave Section 8.2 looking like this: >> >> 8.2. Mergers and Acquisitions >> >> ARIN will consider requests for the transfer of number resources in the >> case of mergers, acquisitions, and reorganizations under the following >> conditions: >> >> The current registrant must not be involved in any dispute as to the >> status of the resources to be transferred. >> >> The new entity must sign an RSA covering all resources to be transferred. >> >> The resources to be transferred will be subject to ARIN policies. >> >> The minimum transfer size is the smaller of the original allocation size >> or the applicable minimum allocation size in current policy. >> >> AND one or more of the following: >> >> The recipient must provide independently verifiable evidence that they >> have acquired the assets that use the resources to be transferred from the >> current registrant. >> >> OR >> >> The recipient must show that they have acquired the entire corporate >> entity which is the current registrant. >> >> >> >> ___ >> PPML >> You are receiving this message because you are subscribed to >> the ARIN Public Policy Mailing List (ARIN-PPML@arin.net). >> Unsubscribe or manage your mailing list subscription at: >> http://lists.arin.net/mailman/listinfo/arin-ppml >> Please contact i...@arin.net if you experience any issues. >> > > > > -- > === > David Farmer Email:far...@umn.edu > Networking & Telecommunication Services > Office of Information Technology > University of Minnesota > 2218 University Ave SEPhone: 612-626-0815 <(612)%20626-0815> > Minneapolis, MN 55414-3029 Cell: 612-812-9952 <(612)%20812-9952> > === > > ___ > PPML > You are receiving this message because you are subscribed to > the ARIN Public Policy Mailing List (ARIN-PPML@arin.net). > Unsubscribe or manage your mailing list subscription at: > http://lists.arin.net/mailman/listinfo/arin-ppml > Please contact i...@arin.net if you experience any issues. > ___ PPML You are receiving this message because you are subscribed to the ARIN Public Policy Mailing List (ARIN-PPML@arin.net). Unsubscribe or manage your mailing list subscription at: http://lists.arin.net/mailman/listinfo/arin-ppml Please contact i...@arin.net if you experience any issues.
Re: [arin-ppml] 2016-9 Streamline Merger & Acquisition Transfers - Text modifications
In the most general sense a state is a corporation. See; https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Corporation#History Further, in most cases the agencies of a state are not independent but sub-parts of the whole. Therefore, moving resources between agencies should more properly be considered a reorganization of a single entity, in most situations, and not a transfer between separate entities. Also, I'd expect ARIN would provide some level of deference to sovereign government entities like states, especially in an interagency type situation. However, to protect itself, I would expect ARIN would want to ensure they are dealing with someone with the proper authority to act on the state's behalf. So, I could imagine ARIN asking a state (or agency) to provide evidence (such as a quote of applicable statute) of who has authority over the agencies and/or resources in question. I expect this would be especially be true, if resources were being transferred out of a State's control. Thanks. On Tue, Jan 24, 2017 at 5:59 PM, Richard J. Letts <rjle...@uw.edu> wrote: > This assumes that only corporate entities merge, acquire, or re-organize. > How would state agencies or an inter-institution research group produce the > required documentation to facilitate the movement of resources given the > lack of independently verifiable information? > > > > Similarly, a function might be transferred between state agencies, but we > might not be acquiring an entire corporate entity (as we’re a state agency). > > > > Richard > > > > *From: *ARIN-PPML <arin-ppml-boun...@arin.net> on behalf of John Springer > <3jo...@gmail.com> > *Date: *Tuesday, January 24, 2017 at 12:32 PM > *To: *"arin-ppml@arin.net" <arin-ppml@arin.net> > *Subject: *[arin-ppml] 2016-9 Streamline Merger & Acquisition Transfers - > Text modifications > > > > These two changes will leave Section 8.2 looking like this: > > 8.2. Mergers and Acquisitions > > ARIN will consider requests for the transfer of number resources in the > case of mergers, acquisitions, and reorganizations under the following > conditions: > > The current registrant must not be involved in any dispute as to the > status of the resources to be transferred. > > The new entity must sign an RSA covering all resources to be transferred. > > The resources to be transferred will be subject to ARIN policies. > > The minimum transfer size is the smaller of the original allocation size > or the applicable minimum allocation size in current policy. > > AND one or more of the following: > > The recipient must provide independently verifiable evidence that they > have acquired the assets that use the resources to be transferred from the > current registrant. > > OR > > The recipient must show that they have acquired the entire corporate > entity which is the current registrant. > > > > ___ > PPML > You are receiving this message because you are subscribed to > the ARIN Public Policy Mailing List (ARIN-PPML@arin.net). > Unsubscribe or manage your mailing list subscription at: > http://lists.arin.net/mailman/listinfo/arin-ppml > Please contact i...@arin.net if you experience any issues. > -- === David Farmer Email:far...@umn.edu Networking & Telecommunication Services Office of Information Technology University of Minnesota 2218 University Ave SEPhone: 612-626-0815 Minneapolis, MN 55414-3029 Cell: 612-812-9952 === ___ PPML You are receiving this message because you are subscribed to the ARIN Public Policy Mailing List (ARIN-PPML@arin.net). Unsubscribe or manage your mailing list subscription at: http://lists.arin.net/mailman/listinfo/arin-ppml Please contact i...@arin.net if you experience any issues.
Re: [arin-ppml] 2016-9 Streamline Merger & Acquisition Transfers - Text modifications
That is a question for ARIN staff to weigh in on.
What “independently verifiable evidence” would be acceptable if no assets (I
assume this means servers or routers rather than human beings) using the
resources are being moved?
Richard
From: Scott Leibrand [mailto:scottleibr...@gmail.com]
Sent: Tuesday, January 24, 2017 4:13 PM
To: Richard J. Letts <rjle...@uw.edu>
Cc: arin-ppml@arin.net
Subject: Re: [arin-ppml] 2016-9 Streamline Merger & Acquisition Transfers -
Text modifications
Wouldn't the existing language ("The recipient must provide independently
verifiable evidence that they have acquired the assets that use the resources
to be transferred from the current registrant.") be good enough for those
scenarios? The additional OR clause seems mostly meant to deal with defunct
entities where the assets that use the resources are long gone, and all that's
left is the original corporate entity. Are there any cases in the government
realm where that is a problem as well, and M transfers can't be completed
under the existing rules?
-Scott
On Tue, Jan 24, 2017 at 3:59 PM, Richard J. Letts
<rjle...@uw.edu<mailto:rjle...@uw.edu>> wrote:
This assumes that only corporate entities merge, acquire, or re-organize. How
would state agencies or an inter-institution research group produce the
required documentation to facilitate the movement of resources given the lack
of independently verifiable information?
Similarly, a function might be transferred between state agencies, but we might
not be acquiring an entire corporate entity (as we’re a state agency).
Richard
From: ARIN-PPML <arin-ppml-boun...@arin.net<mailto:arin-ppml-boun...@arin.net>>
on behalf of John Springer <3jo...@gmail.com<mailto:3jo...@gmail.com>>
Date: Tuesday, January 24, 2017 at 12:32 PM
To: "arin-ppml@arin.net<mailto:arin-ppml@arin.net>"
<arin-ppml@arin.net<mailto:arin-ppml@arin.net>>
Subject: [arin-ppml] 2016-9 Streamline Merger & Acquisition Transfers - Text
modifications
These two changes will leave Section 8.2 looking like this:
8.2. Mergers and Acquisitions
ARIN will consider requests for the transfer of number resources in the case of
mergers, acquisitions, and reorganizations under the following conditions:
The current registrant must not be involved in any dispute as to the status of
the resources to be transferred.
The new entity must sign an RSA covering all resources to be transferred.
The resources to be transferred will be subject to ARIN policies.
The minimum transfer size is the smaller of the original allocation size or the
applicable minimum allocation size in current policy.
AND one or more of the following:
The recipient must provide independently verifiable evidence that they have
acquired the assets that use the resources to be transferred from the current
registrant.
OR
The recipient must show that they have acquired the entire corporate entity
which is the current registrant.
___
PPML
You are receiving this message because you are subscribed to
the ARIN Public Policy Mailing List
(ARIN-PPML@arin.net<mailto:ARIN-PPML@arin.net>).
Unsubscribe or manage your mailing list subscription at:
http://lists.arin.net/mailman/listinfo/arin-ppml
Please contact i...@arin.net<mailto:i...@arin.net> if you experience any issues.
___
PPML
You are receiving this message because you are subscribed to
the ARIN Public Policy Mailing List (ARIN-PPML@arin.net).
Unsubscribe or manage your mailing list subscription at:
http://lists.arin.net/mailman/listinfo/arin-ppml
Please contact i...@arin.net if you experience any issues.
Re: [arin-ppml] 2016-9 Streamline Merger & Acquisition Transfers - Text modifications
Wouldn't the existing language ("The recipient must provide independently
verifiable evidence that they have acquired the assets that use the
resources to be transferred from the current registrant.") be good enough
for those scenarios? The additional OR clause seems mostly meant to deal
with defunct entities where the assets that use the resources are long
gone, and all that's left is the original corporate entity. Are there any
cases in the government realm where that is a problem as well, and M
transfers can't be completed under the existing rules?
-Scott
On Tue, Jan 24, 2017 at 3:59 PM, Richard J. Letts <rjle...@uw.edu> wrote:
> This assumes that only corporate entities merge, acquire, or re-organize.
> How would state agencies or an inter-institution research group produce the
> required documentation to facilitate the movement of resources given the
> lack of independently verifiable information?
>
>
>
> Similarly, a function might be transferred between state agencies, but we
> might not be acquiring an entire corporate entity (as we’re a state agency).
>
>
>
> Richard
>
>
>
> *From: *ARIN-PPML <arin-ppml-boun...@arin.net> on behalf of John Springer
> <3jo...@gmail.com>
> *Date: *Tuesday, January 24, 2017 at 12:32 PM
> *To: *"arin-ppml@arin.net" <arin-ppml@arin.net>
> *Subject: *[arin-ppml] 2016-9 Streamline Merger & Acquisition Transfers -
> Text modifications
>
>
>
> These two changes will leave Section 8.2 looking like this:
>
> 8.2. Mergers and Acquisitions
>
> ARIN will consider requests for the transfer of number resources in the
> case of mergers, acquisitions, and reorganizations under the following
> conditions:
>
> The current registrant must not be involved in any dispute as to the
> status of the resources to be transferred.
>
> The new entity must sign an RSA covering all resources to be transferred.
>
> The resources to be transferred will be subject to ARIN policies.
>
> The minimum transfer size is the smaller of the original allocation size
> or the applicable minimum allocation size in current policy.
>
> AND one or more of the following:
>
> The recipient must provide independently verifiable evidence that they
> have acquired the assets that use the resources to be transferred from the
> current registrant.
>
> OR
>
> The recipient must show that they have acquired the entire corporate
> entity which is the current registrant.
>
>
>
> ___
> PPML
> You are receiving this message because you are subscribed to
> the ARIN Public Policy Mailing List (ARIN-PPML@arin.net).
> Unsubscribe or manage your mailing list subscription at:
> http://lists.arin.net/mailman/listinfo/arin-ppml
> Please contact i...@arin.net if you experience any issues.
>
___
PPML
You are receiving this message because you are subscribed to
the ARIN Public Policy Mailing List (ARIN-PPML@arin.net).
Unsubscribe or manage your mailing list subscription at:
http://lists.arin.net/mailman/listinfo/arin-ppml
Please contact i...@arin.net if you experience any issues.
Re: [arin-ppml] 2016-9 Streamline Merger & Acquisition Transfers - Text modifications
This assumes that only corporate entities merge, acquire, or re-organize. How would state agencies or an inter-institution research group produce the required documentation to facilitate the movement of resources given the lack of independently verifiable information? Similarly, a function might be transferred between state agencies, but we might not be acquiring an entire corporate entity (as we’re a state agency). Richard From: ARIN-PPML <arin-ppml-boun...@arin.net> on behalf of John Springer <3jo...@gmail.com> Date: Tuesday, January 24, 2017 at 12:32 PM To: "arin-ppml@arin.net" <arin-ppml@arin.net> Subject: [arin-ppml] 2016-9 Streamline Merger & Acquisition Transfers - Text modifications These two changes will leave Section 8.2 looking like this: 8.2. Mergers and Acquisitions ARIN will consider requests for the transfer of number resources in the case of mergers, acquisitions, and reorganizations under the following conditions: The current registrant must not be involved in any dispute as to the status of the resources to be transferred. The new entity must sign an RSA covering all resources to be transferred. The resources to be transferred will be subject to ARIN policies. The minimum transfer size is the smaller of the original allocation size or the applicable minimum allocation size in current policy. AND one or more of the following: The recipient must provide independently verifiable evidence that they have acquired the assets that use the resources to be transferred from the current registrant. OR The recipient must show that they have acquired the entire corporate entity which is the current registrant. ___ PPML You are receiving this message because you are subscribed to the ARIN Public Policy Mailing List (ARIN-PPML@arin.net). Unsubscribe or manage your mailing list subscription at: http://lists.arin.net/mailman/listinfo/arin-ppml Please contact i...@arin.net if you experience any issues.
Re: [arin-ppml] 2016-9 Streamline Merger & Acquisition Transfers - Text modifications
Tossing my support onto the pile for this one. On Tue, Jan 24, 2017 at 4:16 PM Roberts, Orin <orobe...@bell.ca> wrote: > Agreed it's a step in the right direction. > > Specific to ISP's; I've noted Letters of Authorizations (LOA's) being > common, where one organization uses the resources of another - no change to > ARIN databases. > > > Orin Roberts - CCNA,ITILv3 > > -Original Message- > From: ARIN-PPML [mailto:arin-ppml-boun...@arin.net] On Behalf Of Chris > Woodfield > Sent: January-24-17 5:53 PM > To: John Springer > Cc: arin-ppml@arin.net > Subject: Re: [arin-ppml] 2016-9 Streamline Merger & Acquisition Transfers > - Text modifications > > Strongly support. This is a big win for enhancing whois accuracy with no > substantial downsides that I can see. > > -C > > > On Jan 24, 2017, at 3:32 PM, John Springer <3jo...@gmail.com> wrote: > > > > Greetings PPML, > > > > After discussions between the author, shepherds and the AC, the text of > ARIN Draft Policy 2016-9, Streamline Merger & Acquisition Transfers has > been modified for clarity. > > > > Please reply with thoughts and feedback. They will be very welcome. > > Thank you in advance. > > > > New text: > > > > Problem Statement: > > In the case of a merger or acquisition, current policy encourages not > updating registration data, thus leaving the number resource in the name of > a now defunct entity. > > It is not uncommon for an entity which has bought another entity (with > existing number resources) to leave Organizational data (Whois) in the name > of the acquired company. The requirements in Section 8.2 put a > justification burden on the acquiring organization, which was a legitimate > protection while free pool assignments were available. It is worth > revisiting Section 8.2 and looking for opportunities to simplify the policy > in the interest of improving the registry data. > > Consider the following: > > 1. In the case where both organizations (acquirer, acquired) have > justified their existing number resources from an issuer (e.g. SRI-NIC, > GSI, ARIN) under the policies that were in force at the time of issuance, > the number resources have already been justified once. > > 2. ARIN does not customarily require organizations holding address space > to document utilization except when they are asking ARIN to issue more > space. > > 3. Section 8.2 M is not asking ARIN to issue more space or provide > authorization to acquire space in an 8.3 transfer. It is simply updating > ARIN's database to reflect the current reality, that being that control of > a company has changed. > > Language that speaks of required return or transfer of space is of > questionable enforceability in the context of the current RSA (section 6, > "ARIN has no right to revoke any Included Number Resources under this > Agreement due to lack of utilization by Holder"). > > Clauses that serve to scare organizations away from updating their > information are counter to the goal of good data in whois. > > Policy should allow ARIN staff to concentrate finite resources on > ascertaining corporate chain of custody so as to minimize the chance of > fraudulent transfers rather than auditing space already issued. > > Policy statement: > > Delete the bullet point that reads: > > For mergers and acquisition transfers, the recipient entity must provide > evidence that they have acquired assets that use the resources to be > transferred from the current registrant. ARIN will maintain an up-to-date > list of acceptable types of documentation. > > Add this conditional to the bottom of 8.2 for linguistic clarity: > > "AND one or more of the following: > > The recipient must provide independently verifiable evidence that they > have acquired the assets that use the resources to be transferred from the > current registrant. > > OR > > The recipient must show that they have acquired the entire corporate > entity which is the current registrant." > > Remove the following paragraph from Section 8.2 of the NRPM: > > ARIN will proceed with processing transfer requests even if the number > resources of the combined organizations exceed what can be justified under > current ARIN policy. In that event, ARIN will work with the resource > holder(s) to transfer the extra number resources to other organization(s) > or accept a voluntary return of the extra number resources to ARIN. > > These two changes will leave Section 8.2 looking like this: > > 8.2. Mergers and Acquisitions > > ARIN will consider requests for the transfer of number resources in the > case of m
Re: [arin-ppml] 2016-9 Streamline Merger & Acquisition Transfers - Text modifications
Agreed it's a step in the right direction. Specific to ISP's; I've noted Letters of Authorizations (LOA's) being common, where one organization uses the resources of another - no change to ARIN databases. Orin Roberts - CCNA,ITILv3 -Original Message- From: ARIN-PPML [mailto:arin-ppml-boun...@arin.net] On Behalf Of Chris Woodfield Sent: January-24-17 5:53 PM To: John Springer Cc: arin-ppml@arin.net Subject: Re: [arin-ppml] 2016-9 Streamline Merger & Acquisition Transfers - Text modifications Strongly support. This is a big win for enhancing whois accuracy with no substantial downsides that I can see. -C > On Jan 24, 2017, at 3:32 PM, John Springer <3jo...@gmail.com> wrote: > > Greetings PPML, > > After discussions between the author, shepherds and the AC, the text of ARIN > Draft Policy 2016-9, Streamline Merger & Acquisition Transfers has been > modified for clarity. > > Please reply with thoughts and feedback. They will be very welcome. > Thank you in advance. > > New text: > > Problem Statement: > In the case of a merger or acquisition, current policy encourages not > updating registration data, thus leaving the number resource in the name of a > now defunct entity. > It is not uncommon for an entity which has bought another entity (with > existing number resources) to leave Organizational data (Whois) in the name > of the acquired company. The requirements in Section 8.2 put a justification > burden on the acquiring organization, which was a legitimate protection while > free pool assignments were available. It is worth revisiting Section 8.2 and > looking for opportunities to simplify the policy in the interest of improving > the registry data. > Consider the following: > 1. In the case where both organizations (acquirer, acquired) have justified > their existing number resources from an issuer (e.g. SRI-NIC, GSI, ARIN) > under the policies that were in force at the time of issuance, the number > resources have already been justified once. > 2. ARIN does not customarily require organizations holding address space to > document utilization except when they are asking ARIN to issue more space. > 3. Section 8.2 M is not asking ARIN to issue more space or provide > authorization to acquire space in an 8.3 transfer. It is simply updating > ARIN's database to reflect the current reality, that being that control of a > company has changed. > Language that speaks of required return or transfer of space is of > questionable enforceability in the context of the current RSA (section 6, > "ARIN has no right to revoke any Included Number Resources under this > Agreement due to lack of utilization by Holder"). > Clauses that serve to scare organizations away from updating their > information are counter to the goal of good data in whois. > Policy should allow ARIN staff to concentrate finite resources on > ascertaining corporate chain of custody so as to minimize the chance of > fraudulent transfers rather than auditing space already issued. > Policy statement: > Delete the bullet point that reads: > For mergers and acquisition transfers, the recipient entity must provide > evidence that they have acquired assets that use the resources to be > transferred from the current registrant. ARIN will maintain an up-to-date > list of acceptable types of documentation. > Add this conditional to the bottom of 8.2 for linguistic clarity: > "AND one or more of the following: > The recipient must provide independently verifiable evidence that they have > acquired the assets that use the resources to be transferred from the current > registrant. > OR > The recipient must show that they have acquired the entire corporate entity > which is the current registrant." > Remove the following paragraph from Section 8.2 of the NRPM: > ARIN will proceed with processing transfer requests even if the number > resources of the combined organizations exceed what can be justified under > current ARIN policy. In that event, ARIN will work with the resource > holder(s) to transfer the extra number resources to other organization(s) or > accept a voluntary return of the extra number resources to ARIN. > These two changes will leave Section 8.2 looking like this: > 8.2. Mergers and Acquisitions > ARIN will consider requests for the transfer of number resources in the case > of mergers, acquisitions, and reorganizations under the following conditions: > The current registrant must not be involved in any dispute as to the status > of the resources to be transferred. > The new entity must sign an RSA covering all resources to be transferred. > The resources to be transferred will be subject to ARIN policies. > The minimum transfer size is
Re: [arin-ppml] 2016-9 Streamline Merger & Acquisition Transfers - Text modifications
Strongly support. A good direction for the users of Whois, and for proponents of common sense. Sent from my iPhone > On Jan 24, 2017, at 3:32 PM, John Springer <3jo...@gmail.com> wrote: > > Greetings PPML, > > After discussions between the author, shepherds and the AC, the text of ARIN > Draft Policy 2016-9, Streamline Merger & Acquisition Transfers has been > modified for clarity. > > Please reply with thoughts and feedback. They will be very welcome. > Thank you in advance. > > New text: > > Problem Statement: > In the case of a merger or acquisition, current policy encourages not > updating registration data, thus leaving the number resource in the name of a > now defunct entity. > It is not uncommon for an entity which has bought another entity (with > existing number resources) to leave Organizational data (Whois) in the name > of the acquired company. The requirements in Section 8.2 put a justification > burden on the acquiring organization, which was a legitimate protection while > free pool assignments were available. It is worth revisiting Section 8.2 and > looking for opportunities to simplify the policy in the interest of improving > the registry data. > Consider the following: > 1. In the case where both organizations (acquirer, acquired) have justified > their existing number resources from an issuer (e.g. SRI-NIC, GSI, ARIN) > under the policies that were in force at the time of issuance, the number > resources have already been justified once. > 2. ARIN does not customarily require organizations holding address space to > document utilization except when they are asking ARIN to issue more space. > 3. Section 8.2 M is not asking ARIN to issue more space or provide > authorization to acquire space in an 8.3 transfer. It is simply updating > ARIN's database to reflect the current reality, that being that control of a > company has changed. > Language that speaks of required return or transfer of space is of > questionable enforceability in the context of the current RSA (section 6, > "ARIN has no right to revoke any Included Number Resources under this > Agreement due to lack of utilization by Holder"). > Clauses that serve to scare organizations away from updating their > information are counter to the goal of good data in whois. > Policy should allow ARIN staff to concentrate finite resources on > ascertaining corporate chain of custody so as to minimize the chance of > fraudulent transfers rather than auditing space already issued. > Policy statement: > Delete the bullet point that reads: > For mergers and acquisition transfers, the recipient entity must provide > evidence that they have acquired assets that use the resources to be > transferred from the current registrant. ARIN will maintain an up-to-date > list of acceptable types of documentation. > Add this conditional to the bottom of 8.2 for linguistic clarity: > "AND one or more of the following: > The recipient must provide independently verifiable evidence that they have > acquired the assets that use the resources to be transferred from the current > registrant. > OR > The recipient must show that they have acquired the entire corporate entity > which is the current registrant." > Remove the following paragraph from Section 8.2 of the NRPM: > ARIN will proceed with processing transfer requests even if the number > resources of the combined organizations exceed what can be justified under > current ARIN policy. In that event, ARIN will work with the resource > holder(s) to transfer the extra number resources to other organization(s) or > accept a voluntary return of the extra number resources to ARIN. > These two changes will leave Section 8.2 looking like this: > 8.2. Mergers and Acquisitions > ARIN will consider requests for the transfer of number resources in the case > of mergers, acquisitions, and reorganizations under the following conditions: > The current registrant must not be involved in any dispute as to the status > of the resources to be transferred. > The new entity must sign an RSA covering all resources to be transferred. > The resources to be transferred will be subject to ARIN policies. > The minimum transfer size is the smaller of the original allocation size or > the applicable minimum allocation size in current policy. > AND one or more of the following: > The recipient must provide independently verifiable evidence that they have > acquired the assets that use the resources to be transferred from the current > registrant. > OR > The recipient must show that they have acquired the entire corporate entity > which is the current registrant. > Timetable for implementation: Immediate > > Old text: > > Problem Statement: > It is not uncommon for an entity which has bought another entity (with > existing number resources) to leave Organizational data (Whois) in the name > of the acquired company. The requirements in Section 8.2 put a justification > burden on the
Re: [arin-ppml] 2016-9 Streamline Merger & Acquisition Transfers - Text modifications
Hi John, Support. Let’s not let policy artifacts from the free-pool era contribute to Whois inaccuracy. Mike Burns From: ARIN-PPML [mailto:arin-ppml-boun...@arin.net] On Behalf Of John Springer Sent: Tuesday, January 24, 2017 3:33 PM To: arin-ppml@arin.net Subject: [arin-ppml] 2016-9 Streamline Merger & Acquisition Transfers - Text modifications Greetings PPML, After discussions between the author, shepherds and the AC, the text of ARIN Draft Policy 2016-9, Streamline Merger & Acquisition Transfers has been modified for clarity. Please reply with thoughts and feedback. They will be very welcome. Thank you in advance. New text: Problem Statement: In the case of a merger or acquisition, current policy encourages not updating registration data, thus leaving the number resource in the name of a now defunct entity. It is not uncommon for an entity which has bought another entity (with existing number resources) to leave Organizational data (Whois) in the name of the acquired company. The requirements in Section 8.2 put a justification burden on the acquiring organization, which was a legitimate protection while free pool assignments were available. It is worth revisiting Section 8.2 and looking for opportunities to simplify the policy in the interest of improving the registry data. Consider the following: 1. In the case where both organizations (acquirer, acquired) have justified their existing number resources from an issuer (e.g. SRI-NIC, GSI, ARIN) under the policies that were in force at the time of issuance, the number resources have already been justified once. 2. ARIN does not customarily require organizations holding address space to document utilization except when they are asking ARIN to issue more space. 3. Section 8.2 M is not asking ARIN to issue more space or provide authorization to acquire space in an 8.3 transfer. It is simply updating ARIN's database to reflect the current reality, that being that control of a company has changed. Language that speaks of required return or transfer of space is of questionable enforceability in the context of the current RSA (section 6, "ARIN has no right to revoke any Included Number Resources under this Agreement due to lack of utilization by Holder"). Clauses that serve to scare organizations away from updating their information are counter to the goal of good data in whois. Policy should allow ARIN staff to concentrate finite resources on ascertaining corporate chain of custody so as to minimize the chance of fraudulent transfers rather than auditing space already issued. Policy statement: Delete the bullet point that reads: For mergers and acquisition transfers, the recipient entity must provide evidence that they have acquired assets that use the resources to be transferred from the current registrant. ARIN will maintain an up-to-date list of acceptable types of documentation. Add this conditional to the bottom of 8.2 for linguistic clarity: "AND one or more of the following: The recipient must provide independently verifiable evidence that they have acquired the assets that use the resources to be transferred from the current registrant. OR The recipient must show that they have acquired the entire corporate entity which is the current registrant." Remove the following paragraph from Section 8.2 of the NRPM: ARIN will proceed with processing transfer requests even if the number resources of the combined organizations exceed what can be justified under current ARIN policy. In that event, ARIN will work with the resource holder(s) to transfer the extra number resources to other organization(s) or accept a voluntary return of the extra number resources to ARIN. These two changes will leave Section 8.2 looking like this: 8.2. Mergers and Acquisitions ARIN will consider requests for the transfer of number resources in the case of mergers, acquisitions, and reorganizations under the following conditions: The current registrant must not be involved in any dispute as to the status of the resources to be transferred. The new entity must sign an RSA covering all resources to be transferred. The resources to be transferred will be subject to ARIN policies. The minimum transfer size is the smaller of the original allocation size or the applicable minimum allocation size in current policy. AND one or more of the following: The recipient must provide independently verifiable evidence that they have acquired the assets that use the resources to be transferred from the current registrant. OR The recipient must show that they have acquired the entire corporate entity which is the current registrant. Timetable for implementation: Immediate Old text: Problem Statement: It is not uncommon for an entity which has bought another entity (with existing number resources) to leave Organizational data (Whois) in the n
[arin-ppml] 2016-9 Streamline Merger & Acquisition Transfers - Text modifications
Greetings PPML, After discussions between the author, shepherds and the AC, the text of ARIN Draft Policy 2016-9, Streamline Merger & Acquisition Transfers has been modified for clarity. Please reply with thoughts and feedback. They will be very welcome. Thank you in advance. New text: Problem Statement: In the case of a merger or acquisition, current policy encourages not updating registration data, thus leaving the number resource in the name of a now defunct entity. It is not uncommon for an entity which has bought another entity (with existing number resources) to leave Organizational data (Whois) in the name of the acquired company. The requirements in Section 8.2 put a justification burden on the acquiring organization, which was a legitimate protection while free pool assignments were available. It is worth revisiting Section 8.2 and looking for opportunities to simplify the policy in the interest of improving the registry data. Consider the following: 1. In the case where both organizations (acquirer, acquired) have justified their existing number resources from an issuer (e.g. SRI-NIC, GSI, ARIN) under the policies that were in force at the time of issuance, the number resources have already been justified once. 2. ARIN does not customarily require organizations holding address space to document utilization except when they are asking ARIN to issue more space. 3. Section 8.2 M is not asking ARIN to issue more space or provide authorization to acquire space in an 8.3 transfer. It is simply updating ARIN's database to reflect the current reality, that being that control of a company has changed. Language that speaks of required return or transfer of space is of questionable enforceability in the context of the current RSA (section 6, "ARIN has no right to revoke any Included Number Resources under this Agreement due to lack of utilization by Holder"). Clauses that serve to scare organizations away from updating their information are counter to the goal of good data in whois. Policy should allow ARIN staff to concentrate finite resources on ascertaining corporate chain of custody so as to minimize the chance of fraudulent transfers rather than auditing space already issued. Policy statement: Delete the bullet point that reads: For mergers and acquisition transfers, the recipient entity must provide evidence that they have acquired assets that use the resources to be transferred from the current registrant. ARIN will maintain an up-to-date list of acceptable types of documentation. Add this conditional to the bottom of 8.2 for linguistic clarity: "AND one or more of the following: The recipient must provide independently verifiable evidence that they have acquired the assets that use the resources to be transferred from the current registrant. OR The recipient must show that they have acquired the entire corporate entity which is the current registrant." Remove the following paragraph from Section 8.2 of the NRPM: ARIN will proceed with processing transfer requests even if the number resources of the combined organizations exceed what can be justified under current ARIN policy. In that event, ARIN will work with the resource holder(s) to transfer the extra number resources to other organization(s) or accept a voluntary return of the extra number resources to ARIN. These two changes will leave Section 8.2 looking like this: 8.2. Mergers and Acquisitions ARIN will consider requests for the transfer of number resources in the case of mergers, acquisitions, and reorganizations under the following conditions: The current registrant must not be involved in any dispute as to the status of the resources to be transferred. The new entity must sign an RSA covering all resources to be transferred. The resources to be transferred will be subject to ARIN policies. The minimum transfer size is the smaller of the original allocation size or the applicable minimum allocation size in current policy. AND one or more of the following: The recipient must provide independently verifiable evidence that they have acquired the assets that use the resources to be transferred from the current registrant. OR The recipient must show that they have acquired the entire corporate entity which is the current registrant. Timetable for implementation: Immediate Old text: Problem Statement: It is not uncommon for an entity which has bought another entity (with existing number resources) to leave Organizational data (Whois) in the name of the acquired company. The requirements in Section 8.2 put a justification burden on the acquiring organization, which was a legitimate protection while free pool assignments were available. It is worth revisiting Section 8.2 and looking for opportunities to simplify the policy in the interest of improving the registry data. Consider the following: 1. Both organizations (acquirer, acquired) have justified their existing number resources from an issuer (e.g. SRI-NIC, GSI, ARIN) under the policies
