[ppml] Resurrecting ULA Central [was: Re: Policy Proposal 2006-2: Micro-allocations for Internal

[Thomas Narten]

"George Kuzmowycz" <George.Kuzmowycz at aipso.com> writes:

> David Williamson <dlw+arin at tellme.com> wrote on 04/25/2006 9:42:40 AM:

> > Sounds like I better go read the draft.  I agree that ownership
> > rights would be a problem

> Why is the (potential) ownership of IP addresses a Bad Thing?

For public addresses that will be routed on the public internet,
having them be "leased" rather than "owned" provides some amount of
leverage (just how much is a matter of debate) against
misbehavior. I.e., if an address holder wants to get more address
space, but they haven't been playing by the rules, ARIN can say "but
you aren't adhering to your agreement"... In more extreme cases, one
can imagine ARIN producing a policy actually revoking the address
space of abusers.

But if address space is "owned", rather than "leased", no such
leverage exists, presumably.

Having said that, ULA space is different, precisely because it is not
intended to be routed publically, so IMO it's much less clear that the
same amount of leverage is needed/appropriate.

Thomas