Most all these problems go away in IPv6. This is because 1) There are
plenty of numbers from the original source and 2) There is no "Legacy"
space. Therefore, to the best of my knowledge there is no brokering of
IPv6 space, nor do we have directed transfer language for IPv6.
Why is it that this language on M&As not strong enough? Having to show a
balance sheet of assets and liabilities certifed by a CPA would certainly
show if it is simply a IP address shell company. If there are no
certified statements, it kinda means that company is likely a tax cheat,
and ARIN should not do business with them. Maybe there should be a
mininum incorporation time, like 3 years before they can receive numbers.
Let them start up with ISP assigned numbers instead, or have them issued
in the names of the principals in trust for the new corporation. This
would limit use of newly minted shell corps, since the principals would
have to be declared to ARIN.
Of course we got here by allowing the directed transfers in the first
place. In the beginning, you were supposed to turn unused numbers back to
the registry for reassignment. Changing that was the mistake. While that
might not have been considered to apply to legacy, it certainly applied to
any numbers issued after the formation of ARIN. We could get back there by
changing the rules for those wanting these directed transfers by taking
away that ability from those numbers if transfered.
M&A was supposed to be limited to "same network, new name or owners".
Banning entities that own no equipment to use the numbers from having
numbers would be a good start but would be difficult to enforce.
Maybe we could tie this into IPv6 by directing all returns into the IPv6
transition pool and not have a general free pool and waiting list at all.
Require everyone receiving IPv4 resources to have and actually use IPv6 as
a condition of any transfer of IPv4 resources. Make ARIN online IPv6 only
might be a good start. After the initial assignment, require ARIN online
logins to take place from one of the assigned IPv6 networks, proving that
IPv6 is being used. Without IPv6, no IPv4 number requests could be made.
The faster we can get to IPv6, the faster this issue will be resolved.
I do not know the magic answer, but I do know there are problems with the
present system. It would be nice if we could assume everyone is honest,
but of course this is not the case.
Albert Erdmann
Network Administrator
Paradise On Line Inc.
On Wed, 27 Feb 2019, Ronald F. Guilmette wrote:
In message <[email protected]>,
[email protected] wrote:
Also needed is language that M&A and Bankruptcy transfers of the
IPv4 addresses can only happen when they are transferred to a new owner
ALONG WITH the underlying network equipment/business using those IPv4
addresses.
That may not even be good enough to prevent abuse.
Nobody should ever underestimate the creativity of financially motivated
and ethically bankrupt actors.
Microsoft used to sell certain Windows licenses with the stiputaion that
they were only to be used in conjunction with new computers.
It didn't take long for the bottom feeders to start reselling said
Windows licenses along with one of the following "new computers":
https://bit.ly/2EA1ix6
Regards,
rfg
_______________________________________________
ARIN-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:
https://lists.arin.net/mailman/listinfo/arin-ppml
Please contact [email protected] if you experience any issues.
_______________________________________________
ARIN-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:
https://lists.arin.net/mailman/listinfo/arin-ppml
Please contact [email protected] if you experience any issues.
