[ppml] IP address theft?

David Conrad david.conrad at nominum.com
Mon Apr 28 18:51:40 EDT 2003


As with pretty much everything related to addressing, the power resides 
with the ISPs.  If they choose to make routable across the 
Internet, then WIANA will have succeeded in their 'theft'.  The only 
thing the IANA and RIRs can do is refuse to modify their databases to 
reflect a change in registration.


On Monday, April 28, 2003, at 03:35  PM, Bill Darte wrote:

> David,
> I understand and agree. In fact the 'legality' is irrelevant.  It is an
> operational imperative that the convention exists and is abided.
> Still if there are those who choose or through ignorance do not 
> cooperate in
> this imperative then there must be some corrective actions in order to
> elicit the proper behavior.
> When no force of law exists (and thankfully military action can be 
> ruled
> out), then the industry which is dependant upon the proper behavior 
> itself
> must enforce compliance.  But, can it?... and if not what then?
> Bill
> <David wrote>
> Bill,
> I am not a lawyer so I won't pretend to know whether it is "theft" in
> the legal sense.
> The global uniqueness of address space that makes the Internet work is
> merely an indirect convention mutually agreed upon by both ISPs and end
> users.  The implementation of this global uniqueness has been via the
> structures represented by the IANA and the RIRs.  Take away those
> conventions as WIANA is attempting to do and something will have to
> take their place.  If you were in charge of a large scale ISP and
> multiple sets of folks all came to you with the same address space they
> claimed to be theirs, which would you choose?  My guess, as I have
> become a bit cynical, would be the one that pays the most...
> Not a place I want to go.
> Rgds,
> -drc
> On Monday, April 28, 2003, at 11:01  AM, Bill Darte wrote:
>> David,
>> I agree with the spirit of the term 'theft' in your message regard
>> below, but I am not sure about the literal definition.
>> It is not property in a tangible sense.  It is not owned, but there is
>> a
>> significant infrastructure of 'stewardship' which makes the
>> infrastructure
>> reliable and predictable.
>> Its unsanctioned use is a violation of the protocol in use, but is it
>> theft
>> in the eyes of the law?
>> If addresses allocated to ARIN are squatted, does ARIN's incorporation
>> or
>> the allocation process give it 'rights' under the law to exclusive
>> dominion
>> on these 'things'?
>> Do you use the term literally or figuratively?
>> Bill Darte
>>> Michael,
>>> On Monday, April 28, 2003, at 01:41  AM, Michael.Dillon at radianz.com
>>> wrote:
>>>>> They are trying to steal 1/8.  Why should anyone condone
>>> such action?
>>>> They are trying to use it, not steal it.
>>> Which is what a car jacker might say.
>>> They have unilaterally asserted the use of, which according
>>> to the _only_ authority used to date (the IANA) has been
>>> reserved since
>>> 1981.  By this unilateral assertion, they are attempting to
>>> remove that
>>> address space from the pool of unallocated addresses without
>>> following
>>> existing, published address allocation policies.
>>> This is theft.
>>>> The RIRs no longer need to conserve IPv4 address space.
>>> This isn't about conserving address space or whether or not they are
>>> using address space for a valid reason.  The Internet works because
>>> most people see it is in their self-interest to cooperate.  Part of
>>> this cooperation is to agree to use the Internet registry system
>>> including the IANA as a meeting point to define global
>>> addressability.
>>> The folks at WIANA have chosen to ignore this cooperative system for,
>>> as far as I can tell, no good reason.  Perhaps you have different
>>> information?
>>> Rgds,
>>> -drc

More information about the ARIN-PPML mailing list