[ppml] IPv6 flawed?

[Kevin Kargel]

I still have a hard time with this..  ARIN serves a wide area..  far
wider than just the United States or Canada..  which government are you
referencing that is giving ARIN authority and control?  Which
governmental agency is on the documents you refer to?

 

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Dean Anderson [mailto:dean at av8.com] 
> Sent: Tuesday, September 18, 2007 8:34 PM
> To: Kevin Kargel
> Cc: 
> Subject: RE: [ppml] IPv6 flawed?
> 
> On Tue, 18 Sep 2007, Kevin Kargel wrote:
> 
> > > > So far as I know, Legacy owners have no license from "the
> > > government"..
> > > > there is no piece of paper from "the government" giving 
> them rights.
> > > > Maybe I am wrong, but I have not heard of such a document.  
> > > 
> > > There is indeed a piece of paper, and ARIN keeps it in a book.  
> > > Registrations were originally by paper and mail.  I suppose you 
> > > young'uns don't know what those are. We also didn't have 
> cell phones 
> > > back that, and numeric pagers were "cool", unless you had 
> to carry 
> > > one for work.
> > > 
> > 
> > But that piece of paper is not from a "government".  ARIN is not a 
> > governmental agency or department,
> 
> The legacy paper is not from ARIN. It is from SRI, or NetSol, 
> on behalf of the government.  The government told SRI to give 
> the records to NetSol. SRI didn't invent that transfer. Then 
> the G. told NetSol to give the records to ARIN. NetSol didn't 
> invent that.  The G. can tell ARIN to give the records to 
> someone else.  The records don't belong to ARIN.
> ARIN is just the administrator.
> 
> The 'paper', electronic records of delegation, you get from 
> ARIN is on behalf of the government. The RSA terms are 
> different from the legacy terms.  Even within the ARIN RSA 
> regime, there are different sets of terms, as the court found 
> in the Kremen case: It found 3 different sets of terms that 
> Kremen could accept.
> 
> > they are not paid through tax dollars, they do not carry 
> the "force of 
> > law".
> 
> ARIN doesn't have to be a goverment agency 'paid by tax 
> dollars with force of law' to administer government records. 
> Many government activities are paid directly through fees to 
> private contractors, as the toll road operation example 
> demonstrates.  The government has long used private 
> contractors to perform some functions for the government, and 
> the practice is increasing. The lack of tax dollars and force 
> of law does not prove your claim that the records are the 
> private property of ARIN and that ARIN can do with them as it pleases.
> 
> BTW, some government agencies paid by tax dollars don't have 
> 'force of law' (NIST comes to mind as an example of that)
> 
> The records are government records, licenses/leases, that 
> ARIN maintains and administers and in return collects fees. 
> Just like the toll road operator maintains the road and in 
> return collects fees.
> 
> > I still maintain that legacy holders hold no license from any 
> > government to the use of those numbers.
> 
> You seem to have no facts to support that argument, and what 
> facts there are, contradict that view.
> 
> > I also still maintain that we should let them continue to use them, 
> > but because it is right, not because it would be illegal to do 
> > otherwise.
> 
> It is right. And it is also illegal to do otherwise (well, 
> illegal isn't the precisely correct word. It violates the 
> legal rights of the legacy in the license/lease to do 
> otherwise; 'illegal' usually suggests there is a law that 
> would be violated by doing so, which isn't the case)
> 
> 		--Dean
> 
> -- 
> Av8 Internet   Prepared to pay a premium for better service?
> www.av8.net         faster, more reliable, better service
> 617 344 9000   
> 
> 
>