[ppml] Counsel statement on Legacy assignments?

[Peter Eisch]

After months of reading "interesting" email about legacy holders, what
direct communication has happened to these organizations to bring them into
the fold?  Until they are here (or a party to another less general list) the
discussion continues to be engaged by only the mostly non-affected elite.

In this forum the discussions are typically emotional, theoretical and
rarely based on facts.  This is typical of a guidance list.  It's good to
get ideas bounced around and get the input from a wide audience.

Could some effort be spent on getting the attention of the legacy holders
and establish a communication channel with them?  You have maybe a dozen
[individual] readers here with legacy holdings.  I'll suspect that we're not
the majority and we surely can't speak for the balance.

Until they're present and a part of the process this discussion continues to
be little more than "us" and "them" and clearly without community
perspective.

peter

On 10/5/07 9:26 AM, "Bill Darte" <BillD at cait.wustl.edu> wrote:

> Seems to me that since there exists a vocal segment of the community
> that wants ARIN to engage the legacy holders and to encourage or impose
> upon them some obligations or limit their 'free' services, it is wise
> that ARIN consider what authority exists...should the broader community
> come to believe as the vocal segment.
> 
> Discussion of this authority and options to BOTH encourage or impose...
> in an open and straightforward manner is the right thing to do. IMO.
> 
> If the legacy community feels threatened by such, then I encourage all
> to better understand the process in which such discussion is taking
> place and the means that exists to influence those discussions and
> community perspective...by engaging the community at large and ARIN
> through participation.
> 
> Bill Darte
> ARIN Advisory Council
> 
> 
> -----Original Message-----
> From: ppml-bounces at arin.net [mailto:ppml-bounces at arin.net] On Behalf Of
> William Herrin
> Sent: Friday, October 05, 2007 8:46 AM
> To: John Curran
> Cc: ppml at arin.net
> Subject: Re: [ppml] Counsel statement on Legacy assignments?
> 
> On 10/5/07, John Curran <jcurran at istaff.org> wrote:
>>    In any case, both legacy holders and ARIN appear to have
>>    obligations to the community.  ARIN will certainly do as the
>>    community directs, but one wonders if the legacy community
>>    would like us all to forget their community obligations and
>>    simply pretend that their assignments were done in a total
>>    contractual and community obligation vacuum...
> 
> John,
> 
> Don't take me wrong; I think the current ARIN process is a sound one
> and I think it would be healthy to bring as many folks into the fold
> as possible. I'm particularly fond of proposals which encourage IPv4
> assignments to segue into IPv6 assingments with both coming under the
> ARIN RSA in the process.
> 
> I don't think the "stick" approach is healthy. Even just having
> discussions about discontinuing folks' RDNS creates a comment record
> where any legacy registrant lurking about must think we're all a bunch
> of a-holes. How that activity and perception furthers ARIN's mission
> completely escapes me.
> 
> Regards,
> Bill Herrin
>