[ppml] Counsel statement on Legacy assignments?

After months of reading "interesting" email about legacy holders, what
direct communication has happened to these organizations to bring them into
the fold?  Until they are here (or a party to another less general list) the
discussion continues to be engaged by only the mostly non-affected elite.

In this forum the discussions are typically emotional, theoretical and
rarely based on facts.  This is typical of a guidance list.  It's good to
get ideas bounced around and get the input from a wide audience.

Could some effort be spent on getting the attention of the legacy holders
and establish a communication channel with them?  You have maybe a dozen
[individual] readers here with legacy holdings.  I'll suspect that we're not
the majority and we surely can't speak for the balance.

Until they're present and a part of the process this discussion continues to
be little more than "us" and "them" and clearly without community
perspective.

peter

On 10/5/07 9:26 AM, "Bill Darte" <BillD at cait.wustl.edu> wrote:

> Seems to me that since there exists a vocal segment of the community
> that wants ARIN to engage the legacy holders and to encourage or impose
> upon them some obligations or limit their 'free' services, it is wise
> that ARIN consider what authority exists...should the broader community
> come to believe as the vocal segment.
> 
> Discussion of this authority and options to BOTH encourage or impose...
> in an open and straightforward manner is the right thing to do. IMO.
> 
> If the legacy community feels threatened by such, then I encourage all
> to better understand the process in which such discussion is taking
> place and the means that exists to influence those discussions and
> community perspective...by engaging the community at large and ARIN
> through participation.
> 
> Bill Darte
> ARIN Advisory Council
> 
> 
> -----Original Message-----
> From: ppml-bounces at arin.net [mailto:ppml-bounces at arin.net] On Behalf Of
> William Herrin
> Sent: Friday, October 05, 2007 8:46 AM
> To: John Curran
> Cc: ppml at arin.net
> Subject: Re: [ppml] Counsel statement on Legacy assignments?
> 
> On 10/5/07, John Curran <jcurran at istaff.org> wrote:
>>    In any case, both legacy holders and ARIN appear to have
>>    obligations to the community.  ARIN will certainly do as the
>>    community directs, but one wonders if the legacy community
>>    would like us all to forget their community obligations and
>>    simply pretend that their assignments were done in a total
>>    contractual and community obligation vacuum...
> 
> John,
> 
> Don't take me wrong; I think the current ARIN process is a sound one
> and I think it would be healthy to bring as many folks into the fold
> as possible. I'm particularly fond of proposals which encourage IPv4
> assignments to segue into IPv6 assingments with both coming under the
> ARIN RSA in the process.
> 
> I don't think the "stick" approach is healthy. Even just having
> discussions about discontinuing folks' RDNS creates a comment record
> where any legacy registrant lurking about must think we're all a bunch
> of a-holes. How that activity and perception furthers ARIN's mission
> completely escapes me.
> 
> Regards,
> Bill Herrin
>