At 12:12 2/26/97, Jim Fleming wrote:
>Now, you might not agree that the InterNIC should
>be kept in tact to provide stability, etc. You also
>might not agree that the InterNIC has been a success.
Jim - Since the cooperative agreement exists and specifically
tasks the InterNIC to handle this IP registry functions, their
ability to not provide such services is quite likely predicated
upon ARIN's success.
>In closing, can you or anyone explain in GREAT detail
>why everyone seems to have decided that the IP address
>allocations be split from the InterNIC, especially when their
>is only one+ year left on the Cooperative Agreement ?
The costs of IP registry services are currently rolled into
the entire InterNIC costs. These costs are offset principally
by DNS registration service fees which quite likely will undergo
significant changes over the next year with whatever combination
of new name registries emerge.
Given the operational importance of functional registry services,
it's desirable to start the transition of these services to a
self-sustaining financial base sooner rather than later. One
additional benefit of such a transition is the ability to open
up the policy formation process to those actually affected by
the IP registry services.
Presumably, we could wait until the cooperative agreement nearly
expires to create ARIN; that would create serious risk to perform
a flash cutover of facilities and authority to whatever structures
emerged as successor.