[ppml] Dean Anderson, 130.105.0.0/16 and the future of the IPv4 Internet.

>-----Original Message-----
>From: ppml-bounces at arin.net [mailto:ppml-bounces at arin.net]On Behalf Of
>David Schwartz
>Sent: Wednesday, July 25, 2007 5:46 AM
>To: Leo Bicknell
>Cc: ppml at arin.net
>Subject: Re: [ppml] Dean Anderson,130.105.0.0/16 and the future of the
>IPv4 Internet.
>
>
>
>> Why use the terms "legacy space" and "legacy address-holder" in this
>> context at all? To me it sounds like implicit acceptance of the
>> principle that ip-addresses are assets. Laws and regulations change over
>> time in real life. Why should the internet be any different? You either
>> play by *current* rules or not at all. Anybody can suggest changes to
>> the policies, but you can't opt to stick to old rules or invent your own
>> and expect to stay in the game.
>
>The current rules are that you must agree to certain things as a condition
>of getting address space assigned to you. In the distance past, address
>space

wrong, IPv4 address space, not address space.

 was treated essentially as property. Legacy holders can make a
>reasonable claim that they own their address space

wrong, IPv4 address space, not address space.

>and are grandfathered.
>
>It is not clear what legal or administrative process would be 
>appropriate to
>defeat this claim.

Unnecessary.  IPv6 was never treated as "property" so even if this screwy
daffynition of numbers as property were to ever hold up in silly-court, it
would only apply to IPv4.

Ted