[ppml] Dean Anderson, 130.105.0.0/16 and the future of the IPv4 Internet.
James Hess
mysidia at gmail.com
Wed Jul 25 02:11:12 EDT 2007
- Previous message: [ppml] Dean Anderson, 130.105.0.0/16 and the future of the IPv4 Internet.
- Next message: [ppml] Dean Anderson, 130.105.0.0/16 and the future of the IPv4 Internet.
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
On 7/24/07, Dean Anderson <dean at av8.com> wrote: > I dispute that. ARIN is required to perform the services that IANA has > delegated to it. Legacy services are part of that delegation. This is > like saying ARIN has no obligation to cart the boxes of legacy records > to a new office. Or to convert legacy records to a new electronic > format. Any service that required, ARIN is required to perform for > everyone. Any service that required, ARIN is required to perform for everyone... but only under the same terms. Legacy assignees that have not signed an RSA are not operating on the same terms, in fact, a legacy assignee by definition has no agreement for "services" to be provided. ARIN may by policy choose to provide the same services, but this is different from being obligated to someone else to do so. In that regard, the obligation for ARIN towards legacy holders is to follow its own policies and mission/purpose RIR obligations are spelled out by the ASO MOU and the numbering policy of ICANN, very basic requirements. It would be a choice of ARIN by policy whether additional services are performed for legacy holders, without signing of a RSA. However the requirement for equal treatment of all organizations making requests of a RIR (like a request for a certificate), would suggest that ARIN should require a RSA to be signed before providing the service, unless ARIN were to start providing a way for release of "non-legacy registrations" from their RSA, while maintaining the registration As a matter of policy, ARIN should be objective and impartial, and therefore not treat requestors who are "legacy registrants" with undue favor over new registrants. > I think you still fail to grasp that ARIN is an agent of IANA, that is > to say, the US Government; That the records and assignments belong > ultimately to the government, not to ARIN. I think you failed to grasp that ARIN is in fact NOT an agent of IANA, and the fact that a record appears or doesn't appear in a regional registry is not something the US government has the authority over. That is a matter between the registry and registrants they serve. Re-iterating that ARIN is an agent of IANA does not make it true. Any more than repeating that "Internet is a US government-owned network" would make it true. > Advertising someone elses active block would be a civil and/or criminal > violation of the Computer Fraud and Abuse Act and the Wiretap Act. [as > Chris Morrow discovered for advertising /22 masks to 198.3.136/21, and > as Martin Hannigan quite nearly found out for advertising a route to > Sanford Wallace's net block in 1996. If I hadn't met Hannigan at the Not necessarily. > I don't think I'll be asking for a certificate. But I expect if ARIN > offers certificate services, other Legacy holders might want > certificates, and will be entitled to the same services as everyone > else. They will be entitled to the same services as everyone else, but only if they also sign the same agreements, that everyone else has signed, in order to subscribe to the additional services. -- -J
- Previous message: [ppml] Dean Anderson, 130.105.0.0/16 and the future of the IPv4 Internet.
- Next message: [ppml] Dean Anderson, 130.105.0.0/16 and the future of the IPv4 Internet.
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
More information about the PPML mailing list