[arin-ppml] A compromise on legacy space?

Leo Bicknell bicknell at ufp.org
Wed Sep 10 11:28:24 EDT 2008

In a message written on Wed, Sep 10, 2008 at 09:46:58AM -0500, Stephen Sprunk wrote:
> > I do not believe ARIN can dump the entry from their internal database or assign the same numbers to someone else.
> >   
> I do not see any law or contract that would prevent ARIN from assigning 
> or allocating those numbers to someone else.

There is no law.  As for contract, I believe there is an implied
contract here.  ARIN is a successor in interest to contracts made
between ARINs precedessors and those who received legacy space.

The debate isn't so much about is there or is there not a contract,
from a legal perspective if two people agree to something there is
a contract, perhaps just a verbal one.  The debate is what the terms
of that contract are; and what the obligations are on both sides.

Setting aside my own personal views I attepted to come up with a
compromise that all sides could accept.  To that end I think it's
not unreasonable to accept the premise that legacy records were
assigned "indefinately", and thus should not be "revoked" in the
general case.  Not wanting to purchase ARIN services is not grounds
to revoke.  Fraud against ARIN (as a successor in interest) would
be grounds to revoke; as I think you can argue the original contract
implied you didn't lie to the person you received space from (that's
pretty standard in all contracts, anyway).

> > I have no issues with limiting the entire scope of my original post to IPv4 only.  Thus group 1 would include any entity with IPv4 addresses under an RSA, and not include IPv6 or ASN holders.
> >   
> Why exclude ASNs?  My employer has legacy IPv4 space but an ARIN ASN.  
> Which group do you think we should fall into?  What is the justification 
> for either rolling our legacy space under the RSA or keeping the legacy 
> space under LRSA while we have an ASN under RSA?  You haven't convinced 
> me that either action is fair.

Because it's a compromise.  I am looking at this from the perspective
of what will help the Internet community as a whole.  There are
plenty of individuals who have a /24 and an ASN from the legacy
days.  The effort, on both sides, is high relative to the payoff.

So I lookied for an objective criteria that made the effort by the
legacy holder and ARIN proportional the the benefit to the community.
I believe drawing the line at people who have come back for more IPv4
space is a good line to draw.

       Leo Bicknell - bicknell at ufp.org - CCIE 3440
        PGP keys at http://www.ufp.org/~bicknell/
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 187 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <https://lists.arin.net/pipermail/arin-ppml/attachments/20080910/10cb4736/attachment.sig>

More information about the ARIN-PPML mailing list