[arin-ppml] FW: Proposal: Clarification of draft policy 2009-3 (ARIN-prop-135)

On Feb 21, 2011, at 9:00 PM, Matthew Petach wrote:

> On Sun, Feb 20, 2011 at 6:42 PM, Matthew Petach <mpetach at> wrote:
>> On Sat, Feb 19, 2011 at 6:02 PM, John Curran <jcurran at> wrote:
>>> Correct.  Make the intent of the policy clear and unambiguous.  I believe the AC is working on that presently.
>>> /John
>> I'd like to raise my voice in SUPPORT of the policy proposal to render explicit
>> the set of IPv4 addresses being returned to IANA as "{}".
>> Matt
> To clarify, as I've gotten some questions about my stance;
> those addresses which were allocated by IANA to ARIN for
> the region, I believe should stay within the region.
> Address blocks *not* allocated by IANA to ARIN, namely
> address blocks assigned to "legacy" holders should be returned
> whence they came, if they are freed up, namely to IANA, as those
> never passed through ARIN's hands in the first place.
Most blocks you describe were not allocated by IANA to their
current holders, but, rather by ARIN's predecessors, the SRI
Internic and the NSI Internic, neither of which exists for those
blocks to be returned to.

Care to clarify your stance in light of those facts?