On 9/30/16 1:22 PM, William Herrin wrote:

Note that you can't sell the block as an "owned asset" and have ARIN recognize the change. ARIN does not recognize ownership of IP address blocks, they only recognize registration and authorized agents.

This would seem to be in violation of what the NSF has said about this space. I thought ARIN was slapped hard once before about this very thing? Thanks, -- Bryan Fields 727-409-1194 - Voice http://bryanfields.net

But only the recipient must put them under an RSA in order to have them registered. The source need not have an RSA or LRSA for their legacy blocks, at least as I understand it. I'd also suggest that having a broker is useful, because the few well-known ones that exist are well-versed in the process by now, for all types of sources and destinations. Matthew Kaufman On Fri, Sep 30, 2016 at 12:08 PM William Herrin <bill@herrin.us> wrote:

On Fri, Sep 30, 2016 at 1:34 PM, Bryan Fields <Bryan@bryanfields.net> wrote:

...

On 9/30/16 1:22 PM, William Herrin wrote:

...

Note that you can't sell the block as an "owned asset" and have ARIN recognize the change. ARIN does not recognize ownership of IP address blocks, they only recognize registration and authorized agents.

This would seem to be in violation of what the NSF has said about this space. I thought ARIN was slapped hard once before about this very thing?

To the best of my knowledge, that's not the case. Every relevant court case has ended one of two ways:

1. The addresses were revoked after the POC was (correctly) determined not currently represent the (defunct) registrant. 2. The registrant consented to place the addresses under an ARIN RSA without a judicial ruling. (e.g. Microsoft/Nortel)

Regards, Bill Herrin

-- William Herrin ................ herrin@dirtside.com bill@herrin.us Owner, Dirtside Systems ......... Web: <http://www.dirtside.com/>

The agency with actual authority in these matters (NTIA)

inappropriate use of present tense

On Sun, Oct 2, 2016 at 6:18 PM, John Curran <jcurran@arin.net> wrote:

The agency with actual authority in these matters (NTIA) subsequently issued a statement of the the US Government’s Internet Protocol Numbering Principles, which noted that “the American Registry for Internet Numbers (ARIN) is the RIR for Canada, many Caribbean and North Atlantic islands, and the United States and furthermore that the USG “participates in the development of and is supportive of the policies, processes, and procedures agreed upon by the Internet technical community through ARIN.” <http://www.ntia.doc.gov/blog/2012/united-states-government-s-internet-protocol-numbering-principles>

i.e. ARIN continues to enforce the community-developed policies on all resources in the registry, and including legal undertakings where necessary to that end.

Howdy, In the interest of making the question just about as clear as mud, I would point out several things: 1. The NTIA does not claim to be a source of authority for the management of IP addresses. The things written above are essentially accurate but take care not to read more than was said. 2. No act of congress authorizes the NTIA nor any other branch of the U.S. government to act as a source of authority with respect to IP addresses. \ DARPA had clear authority to control what IP addresses were used on the ARPAnet. NSF had clear authority to control what IP addresses were used on the NSFnet backbone only. Neither claimed any authority over the use of IP addresses on any other network. 3. In it's 20-year history, ARIN has taken no actions whatsoever against legacy address holders inconsistent with legacy address blocks being common law property, save this: ARIN has not consistently updated the registry to reflect a new registrant for an address block unless the new registrant has signed a registration services agreement. Note that ARIN has updated the registrant for legacy registrations without service agreements, just not consistently. ARIN asserts they've taken no action because community developed policy instructs them not to. That is a half-truth. The whole truth is that ARIN has bent over backwards to avoid testing in court whether they have the lawful authority to enforce any policies against legacy address holders, even to the extent of bending or breaking their own policies when settling a court case. For example, Microsoft was permitted to register the Nortel addresses under the weaker Legacy Registration Services Agreement when the plain language of the then-extant policies required the use of the primary RSA. 4. No statute, regulation or judicial finding either confirms or refutes ARIN's ability to lawfully refuse such updates. All relevant cases have either been settled prior to a judicial finding, or resulted in the registration's termination for other reasons (generally fraud of some sort). 5. Regardless of the content's of ARIN's registry, ARIN claims no authority over whether and on whose behalf any specific IP addresses are routed on the Internet, save for those addresses ARIN uses directly for its own purposes. Pragmatically, if you want to buy an address block, the path of least resistance is: register with ARIN.

From a purist "what are my rights" standpoint: John Curran's comments notwithstanding, that's not so clear.

Regards, Bill Herrin -- William Herrin ................ herrin@dirtside.com bill@herrin.us Owner, Dirtside Systems ......... Web: <http://www.dirtside.com/>

On Mon, Oct 3, 2016 at 5:09 PM, John Curran <jcurran@arin.net> wrote:

On 3 Oct 2016, at 4:06 PM, William Herrin <bill@herrin.us> wrote:

...

ARIN asserts they've taken no action because community developed policy instructs them not to. That is a half-truth. The whole truth is that ARIN has bent over backwards to avoid testing in court whether they have the lawful authority to enforce any policies against legacy address holders, even to the extent of bending or breaking their own policies when settling a court case.

Bill - You’re not quite correct with these statements, as there have been many court orders that require parties to enter into an RSA and comply with the IP registry policy

Hi John, I was a little sloppy with my language. When two parties in a court case reach an agreement and ask the judge to accept that agreement, the result is a court order. It is not, however, a precedent-setting judgement.

Half-correct, in that these bankruptcy cases do result in judicial orders; however, the fact that the parties consent to the terms in order to proceed with the transfer is correct. (Presumably they would do otherwise if they had a valid basis for argument, but that hasn’t happened.)

That reasoning escapes me. How does years in court fighting ARIN advantage a buyer in a bankruptcy sale? Make the best deal you can without a fight and quickly close. Bankruptcies are all about pragmatism.

We have routinely argue that IP address blocks are not common law property and prevail - we have never been ordered to make registry updates contrary to the community policy.

You prevail through consent. In one sense, that speaks well of you. But no court has ruled either for you or against you. There is literally no precedent on the matter of addresses as property as a result of the cases ARIN has been involved in. And in my opinion, ARIN has cut a couple shifty deals to avoid having a judge rule in a way that would set a precedent. That probably comes across harsher than I intend. I think it's good that ARIN seeks agreement over conflict. Wise even - addresses handed out after ARIN's inception are governed under much clearer contract law. Enough delay settling the law with respect to legacy IPv4 addresses will let IPv6 render the issue moot. Anyway, my point is that ARIN's position on the matter aside, no one holding legacy IP addresses should believe that addresses as non-property is settled law. And with that I'll get off my soap box and bid you a good evening. Regards, Bill Herrin -- William Herrin ................ herrin@dirtside.com bill@herrin.us Owner, Dirtside Systems ......... Web: <http://www.dirtside.com/>

On 30 Sep 2016, at 1:42 PM, Jim Mercer <jim@reptiles.org> wrote:

On Fri, Sep 30, 2016 at 01:22:19PM -0400, William Herrin wrote:

...

1. Buyer gets approved by ARIN for a specified transfer in the amount to be purchased. Signs RSA. 2. Legacy registrant (seller) signs the LRSA, proves identity and authority to ARIN, places legacy block under the LRSA.

i don't recall having to sign an LRSA, but they certainly do need proof that you are the entity that holds the block.

That’s correct Jim.

...

3. Buyer requests specified transfer from ARIN, seller authorizes it. 4. ARIN transfers registration to buyer, now under the RSA.

if you are a legacy holder, and you want a dead simple way to sell off your rights to blocks, register for the STLS, and get your blocks added to the list. https://www.arin.net/public/secure/downloads/index.xhtml (at the bottom)

this is also a good place to go if you want to buy rights to a block.

you can also solicit offers to buy from anyone on the list.

Also correct - ARIN runs the Specified Transfer Listing Service (STLS) so that parties that wish to be vetted by ARIN may do so in advance, and also optionally be listed as “interested in offers” from others using the STLS service. Also, potential recipients may have their IP address need verified in advance, therefore making them a qualified recipient in the ARIN region. It’s completely optional, but available for those who wish to validate their half of a transfer (whether as a source or recipient) in advance.

works well, and less dodgy-ness, since everyone on the list has been vetted (to some degree) by ARIN.

I’m glad you like the STLS service; it does work well for straightforward transfers among parties. There are some cases (complex corporate changes, long absent or incorrect registration information, etc.) where parties may find the support and guidance of one of the brokers helpful; it doesn’t matter to ARIN either way nor does it change the criteria that we apply - all transfers follow the same policy. Thanks! /John John Curran President and CEO ARIN

Hi, On Fri, Sep 30, 2016 at 10:26:36AM -0700, Seth Mattinen wrote:

On 9/30/16 09:49, Bryan Fields wrote:

...

I'm trying to find a place on ARIN's website where this is addressed, but coming up short. I'm not the seller or buyer in this, but basically someone has a legacy block allocated by Postel and wants to sell the block as it's an owned asset.

What's the process to get ARIN to move the admin/ownership of this? Do they only need to see a valid asset purchase agreement? There is no legacy RSA for this.

It'll have to go under RSA to stay with ARIN.

Or you can do a transfer to RIPE.

carefully note the "or". If you first move it under ARIN's jurisdiction (by signing an RSA) and *then* transfer it to RIPE, it won't be "legacy" any more in the course of the 2nd step and RIPE's 2-yr holding period comes into play (=> it can't be transferred during that time). Note also there's voices recommending not to sign an RSA for legacy space (in certain situations, at least), see http://ipv4marketgroup.com/dont-sign-an-rsa-during-your-82-ipv4-transfer/. best Enno

~Seth

-- Enno Rey ERNW GmbH - Carl-Bosch-Str. 4 - 69115 Heidelberg - www.ernw.de Tel. +49 6221 480390 - Fax 6221 419008 - Cell +49 173 6745902 Handelsregister Mannheim: HRB 337135 Geschaeftsfuehrer: Enno Rey ======================================================= Blog: www.insinuator.net || Conference: www.troopers.de Twitter: @Enno_Insinuator =======================================================

On 30 Sep 2016, at 1:47 PM, Enno Rey <erey@ernw.de> wrote:

... Note also there's voices recommending not to sign an RSA for legacy space (in certain situations, at least), see http://ipv4marketgroup.com/dont-sign-an-rsa-during-your-82-ipv4-transfer/.

Probably best to talk to a variety of IP brokers (including the one publishing the above blog) for more current information, as this has been a fairly rapidly changing area and the referenced blog contains both inaccuracies and statements that lack context. For example, there is a suggestion not to undertake a “NRPM 8.2 Merger and Acquisition IPV4 transfer” due to the need to sign an RSA in the process. The advice may be applicable to some who are adverse to the RSA, but is specifically about only one type of transfer, i.e. transfer via merger and acquisition, not an specified IP address block sale as most people consider… Another example is the assertion that "ARIN says it will then not allow transfers from ARIN to RIPE, once inter-RIR transfers are allowed by RIPE, because there is no “like” needs based policy.” While that might have been correct at one point in time, RIPE did adopt a rather generous needs-based policy that is indeed compatible with ARIN’s inter-RIR transfer policy, and we’ve done many transfers to the RIPE region since that time. The combination of inaccuracies and outdated information dilute the value of historical blog posts, so caveat emptor when revisiting such… FYI, /John John Curran President and CEO ARIN

On 3 Oct 2016, at 3:57 AM, Martin Hannigan <hannigan@gmail.com<mailto:hannigan@gmail.com>> wrote: ... Disclaimer: Get IPv6. Deploy it. Avoid cost. With that said… Indeed: we are likely to have a rather convoluted market supply curve for IPv4 blocks over the next decade, and those dependent on IPv4 as their primary means of network growth will have unpredictable costs as a result. The theme of the thread is that brokers can be useful. I'd argue they are almost imperative for those wishing to be completely informed. I'm not criticizing, but I'd be careful to understand that along with using the STLS (as well as making transfers) comes additional sacrifice of rights and assumption of liabilities. Marty - 100% agreement… while I am quite willing to explain to folks what I believe makes sense for them regarding transfers, I ultimately must represent the best options with respect to delivery of ARIN’s mission to the community. A broker (and/or informed legal counsel) can provide a view which is solely focused on the address holder’s interests – while this may often lead to the same outcome, that is not assured in all cases. Thanks, /John John Curran President and CEO ARIN

On Mon, Oct 03, 2016 at 08:57:01AM -0700, Randy Bush wrote:

fwiw, i did a transfer with the source in arin. i found arin's folk very very helpful, and the process navigable, even for someone who is administratively impaired such as i.

yep, i agree. i recently was the source of a pile of transfers from /24's to a /16, both inside ARIN, as well as a couple out of ARIN into RIPE. also did some with brokers (iptrading.com), as well as direct deals. as long as all the documentation is straight, the process seems to move along cleanly. --jim -- Jim Mercer Reptilian Research jim@reptiles.org +1 416 410-5633 Life should not be a journey to the grave with the intention of arriving safely in a pretty and well preserved body, but rather to skid in broadside in a cloud of smoke, thoroughly used up, totally worn out, and loudly proclaiming "Wow! What a Ride!" -- Hunter S. Thompson