[ppml] Incentive to legacy address holders

[Ted Mittelstaedt]

>-----Original Message-----
>From: John Santos [mailto:JOHN at egh.com]
>Sent: Monday, July 09, 2007 3:59 PM
>To: Ted Mittelstaedt
>Cc: Leo Bicknell; ppml at arin.net
>Subject: RE: [ppml] Incentive to legacy address holders
>
>
>On Mon, 9 Jul 2007, Ted Mittelstaedt wrote:
>
>> 
>> 
>> >-----Original Message-----
>> >From: ppml-bounces at arin.net [mailto:ppml-bounces at arin.net]On Behalf Of
>> >John Santos
>> >Sent: Sunday, July 08, 2007 6:47 PM
>> >To: Leo Bicknell
>> >Cc: ppml at arin.net
>> >Subject: Re: [ppml] Incentive to legacy address holders
>> >
>> >
>> >Under these circumstances, I can't see any sense in doing anything
>> >else but what we are doing now, continuing as a legacy, non-RSA-
>> >signing holder.
>> >
>> 
>> I guess you think your pretty smart in that you have outlined a
>> situation you think isn't solvable in IPv4.
>> 
>> So, when all your customers have switched over to IPv6 and are
>> demanding that you do the same, it appears to me you will be still
>> in exactly the same circumstances.  You customers will still be natting
>> under IPv6 - if you don't think so, go ask them now.
>> 
>> So what are you going to do then
>> Mr. Smarty?  You won't have any legacy class C to fall back on since
>> there isn't an equivalent in IPv6?
>
>What a jerk!!!  

Exactly what I thought when I read your post.

>I described precisely and accurately as I could
>my exact situation.  If you think it is invented, then you are
>totally full of it.
>

I never said it was invented.  I said you outlined a situation you think
isn't solvable.  Since you failed to respond to my question as to what
are you going to do about IPv6, I wonder if your more mad that someone
poked an obvious hole into your scenario than anything else.

>> People can always justify not even trying to follow the rules.
>
>Bull.  I followed the rules, as written, in 1993.
>

And I'm sure that all those people who registered variations of
coca-cola domain names and had them taken away when the Domain Name
System changed the rules to allow notable trademarks to take precidence,
made similar arguments.  This argument is as invalid as arguing 
you shouldn't be given a ticket by a cop for drunk driving because
back in 1993 the legal limit for intoxication was higher, and
while your over the 2007 limit your not over the 1993 limit.

Face the facts.  Your getting something for nothing.  Your getting
tracking and visibility in a system you aren't paying for - in fact,
in a system that -I'm- paying for.  (or more accurately, my employer,
who due to paying for this system has less money he can pay me, and
so forth)  You certainly don't seem appreciative of this.

It seems to me that your doing nothing more than fulfilling the
stereotype of the "evil legacy holder" that some people claim I'm
saying exist (even though I've never made any such claim)

And, as I asked before, how are you going to move your setup to
IPv6?

Ted