[ppml] The WIANA registry

[bmanning at karoshi.com]

> In this instance, I think that there is some precedent for what 
> WIANA is doing with IP addresses. Their activities are not that different 
> from what AMPR does with 44/8.

	Not even.  when AMPR requested space, the minimum allocation
	was a /8 and they justified their use under the then current
	guidelines.  Has WIANA done the same?  It appears to not be 
	the case.  If they have, why would you use words like:
	"legitimize their claim..."

> Exactly. That's why I think that the RIR community and IANA should work 
> with WIANA now to legitimize their claim for IP address space. They do 
> have a legitimate claim to a globally unique block and they are totally 
> unlike the normal applicants for RIR space. Whether or not their activity 
> justifies a whole /8, I don't know. But looking at the way that 44/8 is 
> being managed and also the way that 24/8 was issued to the cable industry, 

	Er, if anything was learned from the net 24 experience, it was that
	the original delegation model as proposed, did not work out and
	we now see 24.0.0.0 back to being managed by the RIRs. 

> >That's a lose-lose situation. If they could justify the space they
> >should have requested it in the first place instead of hijacking it.
> 
> Clearly they did apply somewhere for address space and were turned down. 

	So, unlike AMPR or the cable industry, who were successful in
	their applications (and it took the cable industry several runs
	to get their ducks lined up) you are asserting that the WIANA
	did apply, were turned down, and so took matters into their
	own hands, hijacking space. And it is up to the RIRs to recognise
	the error of their ways and sanction the bahaviour of the WIANA
	by "legitimizing their claim".  Would the WIANA agree with your 
	assertions about their behaviour and motives?

> --Michael Dillon