[ppml] Counsel statement on Legacy assignments?
Cliff Bedore
cliffb at cjbsys.bdb.com
Fri Oct 5 12:24:39 EDT 2007
- Previous message: [ppml] IPv4 Soft Landing - Discussion andSupport/Non-SupportRequested
- Next message: [ppml] SPAM-WARN:Re: Counsel statement on Legacy assignments?
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
I originally sent this to John Curran directly but after reading more comments, I thought I'd post it to the group As a legacy holder who has recently joined the PPML list, I can see certain advantages to joining ARIN. I'm just not sure of the best way to keep my network number safe if I join. I have a Class C (/24) and use it actively but don't use 50% of the numbers at the current time. If ARIN were to have an RSA that lets us join, pay our $100.00 per year and leave us alone with our networks, I'd be happy to join. Do I want to pay $100.00 per year? No but it won't break my small consulting firm and it's probably a good thing to do. I tend to be suspicious of groups that say "We're from the governmet and we're here to help you" I have never seen a government/quasi-government group shrink or give up any power/control except at the point of a gun and I expect most legacy users feel the same way. I expect most are willing to take their chances by maintaining their "legacy" status of being grandfathered into ARIN's in-addr-ARPA service unless there is a very strong specific RSA protecting their status quo. This is not to say that if they need more resources, they should have free rein to get them. People keep working around this but all proposals seem to have more stick than carrot. It would seem to me that the ARIN leadership needs to look at the way to get people to join. There seems to be no concensus on the list about how to do this but if ARIN's goal is to get people to join, they need to take a pro-active stance to get it done. The choices seem to be to leave the legacy owners alone and codify their right to ARIN in-addr service or take strong action to make them default members of ARIN by whatever means necessary. This could go to the point of offering free membership and guarantees of safe harbor for existing numbers with limited other benefits (maybe no voting etc) and then allow full membership for a nominal fee. As others have stated, this is a v4 problem only and will disappear when v6 takes over. I think it is to ARIN's advantage as the numbers get tight toward the end to have as many as possible legacy folks under the ARIN/other RIRs umbrella. The problems of hijacked legacy numbers will only cost ARIN more time and money for lawyers and dispute resolution and I think any action that ARIN takes to get legacy users under ARIN should be taken. This would/should/could include free limited membership and any other incentives needed. Is it fair to the newcomers? In some ways probably not but if they have to pay increased fees to cover the costs of dispute resolution because the legacy users have not joined, they won't be happy about that either. I look at this somewhat like Ford's pardon of Nixon. Was it "fair" for Nixon to walk? No but it was better for the country to get past the embarrassment and back to more important things. ARIN's board needs to decide what is really important and take the appropriate action to achieve that. Food for thought Cliff -- Cliff Bedore 7403 Radcliffe Dr. College Park MD 20740 cliffb at cjbsys.bdb.com http://www.bdb.com Amateur Radio Call Sign W3CB For info on ham radio, http://www.arrl.org/
- Previous message: [ppml] IPv4 Soft Landing - Discussion andSupport/Non-SupportRequested
- Next message: [ppml] SPAM-WARN:Re: Counsel statement on Legacy assignments?
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
More information about the PPML mailing list