[ppml] Counsel statement on Legacy assignments?

>From the discussions I've read about legacy assignments, I see the
following points:

1. Removing the reverse DNS entries, etc. for legacy assignments would
have a detrimental affect on the entire internet community, not just on
the legacy assignment holders.

2. Maintaining the existing reverse DNS entries, etc. for legacy
assignments costs ARIN very little.  Most of the cost is in changes and
the information doesn't change often.

3. Freezing changes to the reverse DNS entries, etc. for legacy
assignments will lead to more errors in the data, which will as
detrimental to ARIN and the entire internet community as it is to the
legacy assignment holders.

4. Re-assigning addresses that have been held by legacy assignment
holders will lead to chaos, unless the legacy assignment holders really
are defunct, dead, or otherwise non-existent.

5. Telling a legacy assignment holder that if you don't join ARIN, we
will do ... to you is more likely to tick off the legacy assignment
holder than to get them to join ARIN.

6. Getting legacy assignment holders involved in the ARIN process is an
advantage to ARIN and the internet community.

7. Spending a lot of time discussing whether or not ARIN has authority
over the legacy address assignments is a complete waste of time -- it
would be much more productive to explain to the legacy assignment
holders why it is a benefit to join ARIN.

Keith

______________________________________________________________
 
Keith W. Hare                     JCC Consulting, Inc.
keith at jcc.com                     600 Newark Road
Phone: 740-587-0157               P.O. Box 381
Fax: 740-587-0163                 Granville, Ohio 43023
http://www.jcc.com                USA
______________________________________________________________
 
 

-----Original Message-----
From: ppml-bounces at arin.net [mailto:ppml-bounces at arin.net] On Behalf Of
John Curran
Sent: Friday, October 05, 2007 7:42 AM
To: Randy Bush
Cc: ppml at arin.net
Subject: Re: [ppml] Counsel statement on Legacy assignments?

At 9:00 AM +0900 10/5/07, Randy Bush wrote:
>if arin does not want to carry out its commitment to the community and 
>to the USG when it was chartered [0], i am sure the community can find 
>an organization more interested in public service.

Intestesting enough, the presentation specifically includes commitment
to following RFC2050, and RFC2050 states:

 "The IANA reserves the right to invalidate any  IP assignments once it
is determined the the  requirement for the address space no longer
exists. "

I imagine there'd be a lot less discussion on not providing services to
the legacy community, if indeed we're were indeed following the original
guidance.  One can reiterate that those assignments predate the RIR's,
but they certainly don't precede the IANA, who was both an RFC2050
author and ex-officio trustee of ARIN.  Either they're bound by this,
and we can't change the rules at all, or they're not and it's perfectly
reasonable to revise other assumptions in handling legacy assignments.

/John



_______________________________________________
PPML
You are receiving this message because you are subscribed to the ARIN
Public Policy Mailing List (PPML at arin.net).
Unsubscribe or manage your mailing list subscription at:
http://lists.arin.net/mailman/listinfo/ppml Please contact the ARIN
Member Services Help Desk at info at arin.net if you experience any issues.