Rebuttal to Mr. Weisberg's insinuations

Jimmy,

>@Home was allocated most of the space in 24.X.X.X directly by Jon
>Postel.

Most?  1/64 == "most"?  Interesting math.

>@Home had no customers and the justification
>for the allocation was something about @Home having
>big plans and a lot of venture capital.

Presumably, Jon and/or Paul discussed the justification with you, so
would you be able to forward the email that confirms this?  Not that I
don't believe you, but... or was the information passed to you over a
phone call?

>Since that time, cable TV companies have lined up
>to be allocated various blocks in the 24.X.X.X space.

And they have gone to @Home for those allocations?  Anything to back
up this assertion?

>Below is a recent listing. 

I'm curious: you constantly append whois output to your messages.  Do
you believe people on the pagan and/or naipr list are unable to do a
"whois 24" themselves if they are interested?

>Maybe you take exception to the usage of the term
>"registry", and do not compare this operation to the
>APNIC registry which you operate. 

Actually, no.  I take exception to your (typical) attempts at
misinformation.

>From an ISP's point of view, the result is the same. 

Is it?  Does @Home delegate blocks of portable address space to other
organizations?  I don't seem to be able to spot any in the whois
database.  I guess they haven't SWIP'd them yet, eh?

>Companies are
>being allocated blocks of IP addresses and anyone
>that is involved in the allocations is a registry or part
>of the registry industry.

Oh, I see, you are using a more general term of "registry".  I'm sure
you had no intent to imply @Home was in any way a registry along the
lines of the regional registries.  Apologies for misinterpreting your
note.

>Why don't you describe your view of the history of
>these allocations, and how these allocations are made.

Given you appear to have already been discussing this situation with
Jon and/or Paul, it would seem you have more information than I do.

Regards,
-drc