[arin-ppml] Borders sells their /16 block

[John Curran]

On Dec 7, 2011, at 12:22 PM, Mike Burns wrote:

>> That's correct, but doesn't also reflect the fact that the assignments in the
>> region were made under a long line of US Government contracts (including IANA
>> and InterNIC), the responsibility for which was transferred to ARIN specifically
>> to give the users of IP numbers in the region a voice in the policies by which
>> they are managed and allocated.[*]
>> 
>> [*] <http://www.nsf.gov/news/news_summ.jsp?cntn_id=102819>
> 
> All the chain of custody documents I have seen start with the US Commerce contract.

The NSF press release above is fairly clear.  There is also the 
corresponding NSF Cooperative Agreement modifications (#6 and #7);
online copies seems to available here:
  <http://www.cavebear.com/archive/nsf-dns/amendment6.html>
  <http://www.icann.org/en/nsi/coopagmt-amend7-03dec97.htm>

> But then we are neither of us lawyers, maybe it's time for ARIN counsel to address this issue openly and transparently?

ARIN's position is quite clear; I repeated it here two days ago:

"ARIN is prepared to manage the Whois registry database in 
 accordance with the number resource policies developed by the 
 community, including the potential legal aspects that might arise 
 in the event of conflict from requests outside of adopted policy."

Parties obviously have available to them mechanisms of the legal 
system if they feel ARIN needs to manage the registry in some 
manner other than based on community policy.  Such parties are
the ones who need to assert alternative legal theories; that is 
what the court system is designed to sort out.

Thanks!
/John

John Curran
President and CEO
ARIN