[arin-ppml] Advisory Council Meeting Results - March 2011
bensons at queuefull.net
Mon Apr 11 14:44:38 EDT 2011
Sorry to labor this point, but it's critical to an understanding of why the AC abandoned prop 136.
On Apr 10, 2011, at 4:00 PM, John Curran wrote:
>> what is the source of your comments that "ARIN is required to serve" and "ARIN is unable to not serve resources in the ARIN region"?
> Again, per the minutes of the AC meeting, I stated 'At inception ARIN expressed a
> commitment to both the US Gov. and to ISP community that we would serve the
> existing number registrations "as-is". ' You can consider this a statement of fact.
Can you clarify: are you referring to an informal "commitment", or a legally binding and documented commitment? This is worth understanding, because it is the difference between a voluntary choice and an enforceable requirement.
Regardless, how does a commitment to "serve" escalate into authority? I.e., the authority to force holders into the ARIN regime. That is what I understand you to mean by "ARIN is unable to not serve resources in the ARIN region".
More information about the ARIN-PPML