[ppml] Policy Proposal: Authentication of Legacy Resources

[Rich Emmings]

On Tue, 10 Jul 2007, Andrew Dul wrote:

> Is there something specific in the policy that you oppose or do you oppose the entire concept?

The idea of a unilateral clubbing doesn't thrill me.

The question of applying ARIN policies to people who have not signed an RSA. 
Neither effects me, but it doesn't strike me as fair, possibly not legal.

>
>>  Much legacy space predates ARIN which makes for odd grandfathering issues.
>>
>
> All legacy space predates ARIN.  Legacy space is defined as space that was 
> assigned/allocated before ARIN.  This policy is intended to try and clean 
> up those "odd grandfathering issues", by formalizing the relationships 
> between legacy space holders and ARIN.
>

I said much in the context of a legacy user who has a signed RSA vs those 
w/o one.  But I'm fine with your definition.

Before an org signs an RSA, they'll need to have a need.  Why sign it otherwise?
The non-ARIN party doesn't gain anything.

Not to muddy the waters, with a side issue, but the data didn't come all 
that clean into ARIN's db, and I have had to do a lot of clean up to make 
all ("my") org's matched up with assets, and I still have a crosslinked (two 
org's, one asset) one from the original import.  A large number of the 
records I needed to fix were not orphaned, but the whois records make it 
look so.



Perhaps:  Get folks to update their whois without needing the RSA, or the 
threat of getting clubbed.  Once the DB is in better shape, futher 
correspondence becomes possible.  However, this will be a lot of work.