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

bmanning at vacation.karoshi.com bmanning at vacation.karoshi.com
Wed Sep 10 17:03:57 EDT 2008

On Wed, Sep 10, 2008 at 10:46:31AM -0500, Stephen Sprunk wrote:
> Jeremy H. Griffith wrote:
> > On Sat, 06 Sep 2008 23:55:58 -0500, Stephen Sprunk <stephen at sprunk.org> wrote:
> >   
> >> Jeremy H. Griffith wrote:    
> >>     
> >>> That's not where I start from.  I start from the belief that a "successor" is necessarily bound to respect the acts of its "predecessors", which issued the legacy resources under terms that were very different from those now being offered:
> >>>
> >>> *  No possibility of return on an involuntary basis.
> >>>    This was essential to encourage us to do the work
> >>>    that led to the current Internet.
> >>>   
> >> There was no statement either way about the basis on which addresses were assigned because, at the time, nobody could conceive that we'd actually run out of addresses and need any of them back.
> >>     
> >
> > Exactly.  So there was no such return requirement made.

	actually, there was. as i noted earlier, there were forced returns/renumbering
	events... -if- you wanted to be connected to the "Internet".
	if you were lucky enough not ot have been caught in the  "connected/disconnected"
	network discussions, you might think that no such requirement was implied, but it
	was there.  (deref all the cruft abt implied and verbal contracts)

	It might instructive to go back and review the FNC minutes and the relevent RFCs
	on what the DoD thought about IPv4, its creation and ultimate arbiter of use.
	To my occasionally faulty memory, for some period of time, DoD asserted that since
	they paid for it, IPv4 was theirs to use as they saw fit and could/would exapropriate
	any other use in times of need.  Now I am fairly sure that concept has not carried forward
	into ARIN's day%%, but if one wants to respect the original terms of use, that should be
	part of the consideration.  e.g.  there are potential times/reasons for forceable
	recovery of space assigned in the pre-cambrian era of the Internet and were when the
	resources left the barn.

%% - modulo violation of applicable law - and no ARIN does not decide that, thats what courts are for

> > There are limits to what the community can choose to do.  For example, it cannot choose to walk into my office and take away my hardware on the grounds that it's using the community network... 
> Taking someone else's property is a crime.  Numbers are not property, 
> though, nor can they be taken away from you.  However, the service of 
> registration _can_, and since you're not paying for it, deciding not to 
> give it to you for free would be perfectly legal -- not theft.

	see http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Eminent_domain

> > Oh please.  I don't want to exhume all those dead bodies, but even in the last month we've been told that the "elephant in the room" is that those legacy people are just waiting to sell their numbers for the highest price

	generally by folks w/ their wallets out, wanting to buy... :)

> > they can get.  When the truth is, I doubt if *any* of us want to sell them at all... we just want to continue the "quiet enjoyment" we've had of them all these years.

	amen. :)


More information about the ARIN-PPML mailing list