[arin-ppml] Policy Proposal: Protective UsageTransferPolicyforIPv4 Address
kkargel at polartel.com
Tue Feb 10 13:14:44 EST 2009
> Just to play devils advocate. Do you believe that all
> organizations that currently believe that they are CI(*)
> have actually gotten PI space (and renumbered as needed),
> or had their lawyers craft the appropriate contract to
> protect them?
> Personally, I do not believe it. I also believe that
> a few eggs will be broken in any transfer, whether
> between ISP.NET and TooMuchMoney.COM or between
> two companies during an acquisition/merger. And
> life will go on, even for CriticalInfrastructure.NET.
Perhaps I am not understanding the definition of "Critical Infrastructure"..
ARIN explicitly defines CI and lays things out neatly for
micro-allocations.. There should be no problem for a network that fits in to
the guidelines from obtaining PI space. If they don't fit the guidelines
then they aren't CI.. it's that simple. Using colloquial CI definitions is
neither productive nor functional. Whether or not one considers themselves
to be CI is moot, the question is whether ARIN recognizes them as CI.
Whether they have taken the time to get the PI and the protections it offers
and renumber into it or not is up to the CI administration.
I for one do not see the necessity of this proposal and do not support it.
> (*) The number of the groups/organizations which consider
> themselves CI seems to growing quite rapidly, as no
> one wants to be left out (does not everyone want to
> be considered "critical", especially when such
> designations often come with potential funding?)
> You are receiving this message because you are subscribed to
> the ARIN Public Policy Mailing List (ARIN-PPML at arin.net).
> Unsubscribe or manage your mailing list subscription at:
> Please contact info at arin.net if you experience any issues.
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Size: 3224 bytes
Desc: not available
More information about the ARIN-PPML