[ppml] Incentive to legacy address holders

[Martin Hannigan]

----- Original Message -----
From: Leo Bicknell <bicknell at ufp.org>
To: ppml at arin.net
Subject: Re: [ppml] Incentive to legacy address holders
Date: Sun, 8 Jul 2007 21:09:39 -0400

> In a message written on Sun, Jul 08, 2007 at 07:17:06PM
> > -0500, Robert Bonomi wrote: Sarcastic or not, you
> > materially misrepresent what the letter says. :) 
> > It says that *IF* you connect to ARPA, or DDN you musc
> > go through a BBN gateway, or the gateway of another ASN,
> > and that some gateway to ARPA or DDN (yours or that
> > other ASNs) must speak EGP. 
> > If you're *not* connecting to ARPA or DDN, then those
> restrictions are moot.
> 
> Actually, I believe you got what I was trying to get
> across perfectly.
> 
> > Now, if/when the time comes that major network operators
> > 'cannot' get additional address-space assignments -they-
> > need, because of a lack of 'unassigned' address-space,
> > *AND* there are significant blocks of 'unannounced'
> space, one *will* see operators starting to use that space
> > , regardless of what  the 'authorities' decree. 
> 
> Exactly.  Back to the original poster's argument that he
> was not bound by RFC 2050 because his allocation predates
> RFC 2050.  If the operators, 99.9% of which are bound by
> 2050 


RFC 2050 is out of date and magically acknowledges it's time
and place in the Internet by talking about "existing"
conditions and technologies. 

Part of our problem is legacy thinking.


-M<