[arin-ppml] Legacy Space authority (fwd)

Ted Mittelstaedt tedm at ipinc.net
Fri May 2 20:11:42 EDT 2008

> -----Original Message-----
> From: arin-ppml-bounces at arin.net 
> [mailto:arin-ppml-bounces at arin.net] On Behalf Of Dean Anderson
> Sent: Friday, May 02, 2008 2:44 PM
> To: ppml at arin.net
> Subject: Re: [arin-ppml] Legacy Space authority (fwd)
> For some reason, this didn't go through.
> ---------- Forwarded message ----------
> Date: Fri, 2 May 2008 15:43:35 -0400 (EDT)
> From: Dean Anderson <dean at av8.com>
> To: Ray Plzak <plzak at arin.net>
> Cc: "ppml at arin.net" <ppml at arin.net>
> Subject: Re: [arin-ppml] Legacy Space authority
> On Fri, 2 May 2008, Ray Plzak wrote:
> > Before the RIRs it was the Internet Registry (IR) which was 
> known as 
> > the DDN NIC (until 1993) and then the InterNIC (1993-1997) that 
> > allocated/assigned IP address space to ISPs and end users. 
> All of the 
> > organizations that operated a version of the Internet Registry were 
> > doing so under a US government contract. ICANN arrived on the scene 
> > after the Internet Registry was supplanted by the RIRs and 
> is not in 
> > this chain of succession.
> This statement about ICANN isn't entirely accurate. While it 
> is true that ICANN was created after the RIRs, ICANN operates 
> IANA, the government function that assigns IP address space.  
> IANA precedes the RIRs and is the successor to DDN NIC and 
> ARPA registry function.  ICANN operates the US Government 
> IANA function as a government contractor, just like SRI 
> previously operated nic.ddn.mil (the DDN NIC).
> Legacy's got their space from the government. So did the RIRs. Those 
> blocks are intangible property, just exactly like domain names. 

You can't know this unless you have a copy of the contract between
the RIR's and IANA which as far as I know has not been made public.
I would assume that there's a clause in it that specifies to the
RIR getting the /8 from IANA that the address is NOT property,
similar to the clause in the contract that an IP requester signs
from the RIR that states IP address is not property.

In any case, US laws are NOT universally recognized by all governments
in the world, including some governments that ARE on the Internet.
Thus so far WIPO has not involved itself in address block assignments
and until such time as it does, IF it does, this legacy argument
(that legacy addresses are property) is confined to the United States.

> ARIN provides two functions: 1) It operates a portion of the 
> government infrastructure function (whois and IN-ADDR) and 
> holds the paper records which belong to the government.  2) 
> ARIN has another function: the delegation of IP address 
> space. In that function, it is sort of like the "ISP of last 
> resort". The space delegated by the second function is the 
> intangible property of ARIN, and those who recieve this 
> delegated space don't get any property rights in that space.
> For Legacy's, ARIN is merely the registrar of deeds.  Like 
> the registrar of deeds that holds the records to the title of 
> your house. Indeed, ARIN holds the paper records for legacys. 
>  When a legacy transfers its space, ARIN updates the records. 
> ARIN does not own the legacy space. The Legacy RSA is an 
> agreement that transfers ownership of legacy space to ARIN.
> The legacy dispute is almost entirely on the issue of 
> intangible property rights.  Some people assert (without 
> proof) that ARIN can capriciously withhold its government 
> obligations of operating whois service and IN-ADDR service to 
> legacy's in order to coerce them into transfering their 
> property to ARIN.

ARIN has stated this on this mailing list, that is, ARIN's legal
council has as I recall.  Yes, this is nothing more than a claim.

Until such time that YOUR assertion that ARIN cannot withhold
whois and IN-ADDR services from legacies is tested in a court of
law, your wild-assed assertions that ARIN has no control over whois
for legacies is nothing more than a claim.

I'll stake ARIN's claim that it CAN withhold whois against your claim
that it cannot, any day.

In fact I'd like to see you put your money where your mouth is
and test this in a court so that this would
be settled - until such time as you do so, please shut up.

> However, since ARIN has no right to 
> withhold these government services; the legal issue of the 
> threat should be investigated.
> Attorney Richter is correct that ARIN has no authority over 
> Legacy space. Whether the space is hijacked or not is 
> unproven. Guilmette's article offers no proof of any 
> allegation, but only innuendo. However, the hijacking of 
> legacy space is a legitmate legal issue; If Richter has 
> actually made false statements about the purchase of SF 
> Packet Radio, he could be (and I think should be) disbarred. 
> There are so far no evidence that the statements by Attorney 
> Richter are false.  One must consider the source of these 
> claims of hijacking.
> Guilmette was previously the operator of the monkeys.org 
> blacklist, which you may remember suddenly shutdown without 
> announcement and blacklisted the entire internet, seriously 
> disrupting the email of his customers who placed their trust 
> in his good judgement and honesty.
> Also, you may find this demand letter from Verio interesting 
> (http://www.monkeys.com/anti-spam/filtering/verio-demand.ps , 
> and related to the veracity of these claims. In the letter, 
> Verio demands that Guilmette remove an IP Address that 
> Guilmette previously blacklisted. The demand arose after 
> Guilmette apparently continued to refuse to remove the block 
> well after Verio reported that the formmail.pl problem was 
> fixed. A copy of the letter may be found at 
> http://www.av8.net/verio-demand.ps, and a pdf conversion is 
> at http://www.av8.net/verio-demand.pdf
> Guilmette associates with Alan Brown, Mathew Sullivan, and 
> John Levine through the spam-l list. Brown is formerly the 
> operator of ORBS.ORG, shut for defamation after making false 
> claims about open relays to profit Brown's ISP, which was 
> also lost in payment of damages). Matthew Sullivan is the 
> ostensible operator SORBS.ORG with Paul Vixie and Dave Rand. 
> SORBS.ORG was hosted by unelected ARIN Board Member Paul Vixie.  
> Vixie denied hosting SORBS and transferred the service to his 
> MAPS.ORG co-founder Dave Rand, but forgot to remove the 
> in-addr.arpa entries.  
> While denying involvement with SORBS, Vixie has curiously 
> been willing to discuss the SORBS business model on 
> ARIN-DISCUSS.  ARIN-DISCUSS is the mailing list restricted to 
> ARIN members for ARIN business, and it seems to be at least a 
> conflict of interest for Board Members to promote their own 
> business using ARIN resources.  Levine is a business partner 
> of Paul Vixie in a commercial bulk email operation called Whitehat.
> Full disclosure: SORBS.ORG also falsely and malicously claims 
> that 198.3.136/21 and 130.105/16 are hijacked.  Dean Anderson 
> is the proper contact for both blocks, and has been for many 
> years. These blocks are not hijacked and there is no reason 
> to think they are or ever have been.

  We are not stupid, and can use Google and whois, Dean.

  130.105/16 lists Open Software Foundation, not you, as the

  You have been told REPEATEDLY by SORBS that all that is required
to remove 130.105/16 from SORBS is a copy of a letter from the OSF
stating that they gave you the netspace.  (that would be The
Open Group today, as OSF merged with X/Open to form that)  If your
use of that netblock is above board I cannot see the difficulty
in that.  Perhaps you could have your lawyer send a -politely-
worded letter to them requesting this, and actually get some
useful work out of the fees you have been paying him all these years.

  If you are the correct contact for 130.105/16 then why don't you
change the name on the block with ARIN?  The only logical answer I can
see is that ARIN considers it hijacked.

  In any case, why you even care about what SORBS is doing is a
mystery.  How long has it been that they have blacklisted that
block?  Nearly a decade.  One would think that any customers you
have on that block who couldn't tolerate this would have left
a long time ago, and the customers you have on that block don't
care that SORBS has it blacklisted.

> I might also add that my participation in PPML and membership 
> in ARIN was unlawfully interrupted in Feburary on the basis 
> of false and fictional claims of per se defamation.

Yep, I remember that although it seems it was for off-topic posting
not for that.

> staff or board members altered my statements to change their 
> meaning,

Nope, I don't remember that happening.

> then falsely attributed the altered statement to me, 
> and then falsely and fraudulently accused me of per se 
> defamation, with the goal of having people rely on their 
> false statements.  One might assume that the CEO of ARIN (Ray 
> Plzak) is either directly or ultimately responsible for the 
> misconduct.

Please, please, please Dean, please sue ARIN.  The resulting
counter-suit once your rediculous statements have been rejected
by the court will surely bankrupt you and you will have to sell
your computer to pay the rent, then we will be rid of this silliness.


More information about the ARIN-PPML mailing list