[arin-ppml] ARIN releases new version of the Legacy Registration

[Jeremy H. Griffith]

On Sat, 6 Sep 2008 19:06:47 -0400, John Curran <jcurran at istaff.org> wrote:

>There does indeed remain some situations (e.g. on termination by ARIN
>due to applicants failure to comply with terms and conditions of the
>agreement) which provide for the revocation of the included resources
>under agreement, 

Yes, and there lies the problem.

>but this is also true of the standard RSA.  

That's irrelevant.  ARIN didn't issue these resources.  Duh.

>It would be fairly easy to further refine what circumstances (if any) 
>warrant revocation, 

IMHO, none at all.  All termination should restore the status quo
as of before the agreement was signed.  That is the *normal* effect
with all other contracts.  This should not be any different.

>but until the community makes that very clear, I personally
>don't see how ARIN can completely exclude it from the Legacy RSA.

Hopefully more of us legacy folks will speak up and encourage
you to do the right thing.  Even if it is like pulling teeth...

These half-measures are encouraging in one sense; they show
some flexibility, rather than the mad-dog punitive mentality
that has characterized way too much of the discussion about
legacy issues.  But in another sense, they are discouraging,
because the best you have come up with is to decrease the 
likelihood of "revocation" of something *you never issued*,
not to eliminate your threat of that inappropriate action.

On Sat, 6 Sep 2008 17:05:21 -0400 (EDT), Cliff Bedore <cliffb at cjbsys.bdb.com> 
wrote:

>ARIN needs to decide if it wants good information from legacy holders (and
>maybe some financial support) or it wants to get too wrapped up in legalese
>and convince people to stay away,

Exactly right.  As Cliff said, you're still offering us a 
dealbreaker.  Too bad.  I was hoping I could sign this one.

--JHG <jhg at omsys.com>