On Wed, Jun 12, 2013 at 1:12 PM, Brandon Ross <br...@pobox.com> wrote: > On Wed, 12 Jun 2013, William Herrin wrote: >> That poses a practical problem. When is a legal entity linked? Even >> the courts struggle with determining whether one legal entity is >> operating under control of another, and that's after subpoenas, >> discovery and comparable activities that you propose ARIN not be >> allowed to evaluate for small transfers. > > How is this a problem unique to the non-needs based, small transfer > proposal? Doesn't this exact problem still exist when you do a needs > assessment?
Hi Brandon, Nope. With a needs assessment in place, we have no cause to care what scope the organization uses to define itself. Only activity within that scope can be used to justify need. Reporting the same instance of need under multiple organizations is fraud. If the shell's use is justified in and of itself, what difference does it make that the shell holds the addresses instead of the parent? Regards, Bill Herrin -- William D. Herrin ................ her...@dirtside.com b...@herrin.us 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 (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.
