[ppml] Posting of Legacy RSA and FAQ

Ted,

I understand the scenario you are pointing out. What I'm curious about
is your assertion that all the Legacy holders will have the opportunity
to provide input to this modified RSA. Also about the assertion that if
a number of them do sign, the remaining ones are all of the opinion they
are turning their back on the RIR system. 

My concern is that many of the conversations on the list have tried to
simplify the topics down to an "us and them". It is not that simple, and
we need to avoid this tendency. There have been a number of Legacy
holders post to this list that are more than willing to try, and find a
middle ground that is a win-win for everyone, and this is just the first
step. It may not have been the intent, but I read your note as "you
better get on board, before the opportunity passes you by", which is not
the best approach.

Who are the admins for all legacy allocations? Are they authorized to
sign an RSA for said company? Has ARIN made the appropriate effort to
track down or verify the legacy allocation, before they are labelled as
advesarial? What is "the appropriate effort"? There is much work that
needs to be done before anyone is given a label, or a final option.

Dan Alexander
ARIN AC


-----Original Message-----
From: ppml-bounces at arin.net [mailto:ppml-bounces at arin.net] On Behalf Of
Ted Mittelstaedt
Sent: Monday, October 15, 2007 5:45 PM
To: David S. Madole; ppml at arin.net
Subject: Re: [ppml] Posting of Legacy RSA and FAQ



>-----Original Message-----
>From: ppml-bounces at arin.net [mailto:ppml-bounces at arin.net]On Behalf Of 
>David S. Madole
>Sent: Monday, October 15, 2007 2:18 PM
>To: ppml at arin.net
>Subject: Re: [ppml] Posting of Legacy RSA and FAQ
>
>
>Can you explain
>the decision that a different RSA will never be offered to legacy
holders?

I explained this already and I don't understand why people have such a
difficult time with this concept but here goes.

There's currently one RSA covering new or additonal requests.

The Legacy holders (probably rightly) felt that it was not to their
advantage to sign that.  They made that known.  The non-Legacy holders
had sympathy and a lot (probably most, we shall see) are somewhat
supportive of a grandfathering approach.  ARIN embodied this with an
outreach for a "special" RSA for legacy holders.  ARIN will not label
this RSA as complete until they have it in a form that a number of
legacy holders like, and are willing to sign.
(otherwise, there would be no point to releasing it)

Once the "special" RSA is done, and signed by many legacy holders, the
legacy holders that didn't sign it will now be facing 2 groups.

The first group will be the non-Legacy holders who had sympathy to
putting out a special RSA.  This group will be having a hard time
understanding why the Legacy holders who didn't sign the legacy RSA are
still arguing over it - after having given them a chance to help edit
it.  The second group will be the Legacy holders who have signed the
special RSA.  This group will be having a hard time understanding why
the Legacy holders who are still arguing are considering themselves
better than they are.

Face with this, I highly doubt that the Legacy holders still arguing
will be able to engender any sympathy from either group.  I think you
would be extremely hard pressed to find a scenario in human history
where a group that didn't even try participating in a peacemaking
session that many of their peers did participate in, had any credibility
left when the session was over and accomodations were worked out.

Ted

_______________________________________________
PPML
You are receiving this message because you are subscribed to the ARIN
Public Policy Mailing List (PPML at arin.net).
Unsubscribe or manage your mailing list subscription at:
http://lists.arin.net/mailman/listinfo/ppml Please contact the ARIN
Member Services Help Desk at info at arin.net if you experience any issues.