[arin-ppml] ARIN-prop-136 Services Opt-out Allowed for Unaffiliated Address Blocks
On Feb 25, 2011, at 1:27 AM, Benson Schliesser wrote:
> On Feb 25, 2011, at 2:36 AM, Bill Woodcock wrote:
>> On Feb 25, 2011, at 12:31 AM, Benson Schliesser wrote:
>>> Where does such authority come from?
>> - From the same government that allocated the addresses to the legacy holder in the first place.
>> You can't have it both ways.
> That seems fair - I agree.
>> 1) The USG had the authority to allocate addresses to legacy holders, and still has the authority to delegate management of those address to ICANN -> NRO -> ARIN, or
>> 2) The USG has no authority in the matter, and thus legacy holders have no claim in the first place.
> Option #1 above is perfectly reasonable. There is a DoC contract with ICANN for the IANA function. In the Joint Project Agreement related to that IANA contract, the DoC instructs ICANN to maintain legal agreements with the RIRs. A review of the NRO history reveals only a non-binding letter of affirmation with the NRO, but let's just assume that is adequate. In the affirmation letter, ICANN delegates responsibility for allocating addresses and "facilitating" development of policies. I do not see the delegation of other powers such as "reclamation" authority etc. Maybe I'm missing something?
You seem to have left out the MOU: http://www.icann.org/en/aso/aso-mou-29oct04.htm
and also the ICANN bylaws: http://www.icann.org/en/general/bylaws.htm#VIII
Those documents combined make it pretty clear that number policy responsibility and address
authority rest in the NRO/ASO.
Again, revocation is the wrong term. Deregistration is a more accurate description of what would
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...