[arin-ppml] Curious about consensus
bicknell at ufp.org
Wed Apr 27 10:39:51 EDT 2011
In a message written on Tue, Apr 26, 2011 at 05:50:21PM -0700, Ted Mittelstaedt wrote:
> >It is because of this I am most curious about Microsoft's motives
> >in this case. They appear to have paid a huge sum for something
> >they could have gotten much cheaper directly from ARIN, and done
> >it in a way that may not have gotten ARIN's recognition. Of course
> >the bankruptcy court just wants cash, and doesn't care about any
> >of these things.
> But they couldn't have got it cheaper because they obviously don't
> meet utilization requirements, not now, and not anytime within the
> next year.
> How much do you want to bet that a year from now most of those Nortel
> numbers will still not be in use?
Well, here's where I can't square what has been said. ARIN's
leadership (mostly JC) has repeated something to the effect of
"Microsoft Complied with all applicable ARIN policies".
I can't find a single ARIN pilicy that doesn't require need, including
8.3 transfers. Even an 8.2 M&A transfer requires it.
So here's our problem in making policy. You're asserting they don't
care about ARIN's process at all. ARIN is asserting the followed
the process. I don't have enough data to back up either claim.
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
Size: 826 bytes
Desc: not available
More information about the ARIN-PPML