ARIN

> Yes, it appears that Randy wasn't seeking special rights for legacy
> holders per se, only trying to protect the usefulness of a complete
> registry by arguing against new (and what might seem to be arbitrary)
> requirements on legacy holder record updates.

while i do not disagree with that argument, all i was actually taking
issue with was the assertion that legacy holders were damaging the
commons.

it was just another sad case of "legacy holders are evil.  have you now
or have you ever been, ..."  an echo of arin's lawyer at nanog, techo-
macarthyism <tm>.

i am a holder of legacy address space.  i am neither proud nor ashamed
of it; it's just an artifact of history.  those who know me know that i
would be extremely glad to be 20-30 years younger.

randy