[ppml] Allocation and reallocation

Jim Romary jromary at kane.jsouth.com
Mon Oct 27 11:18:55 EST 2003

Fees have never part of my calculus. I must stress that I use
the two terms only because those were the two that were used
in my history, and I don't know any better. Now that I am back
in the address mumble mumble game, I can see that the words have
have assumed great meaning and import. As the stakes rise in any
endeavor, constituent elements of the undertaking assume grander

I agree that fees should not be part of this issue, though I
have had customers who have said "We paid Provider A for these
addresses. You need to route them". I wish no Providers charged
for address leasing as unanimity on this issue would decrease the
amount of reeducation needed. Confusion over the true meaing
behind RFC2050 is yet another point of confusion.

|I'd like to ask a simple question of those on the list:
|  Is there a technical reason to have a distinction between ASSIGNMENT
|  -or-
|  Is the distinction between ASSINGMENT and ALLOCATION a means to
|  implementing a fee structure?
|I ask, because if it is the latter, fee structures are not to be
|part of policy (this was made clear at the meeting by the BoT).
|       Leo Bicknell - bicknell at ufp.org - CCIE 3440
|        PGP keys at http://www.ufp.org/~bicknell/
|Read TMBG List - tmbg-list-request at tmbg.org, www.tmbg.org

More information about the ARIN-PPML mailing list