[arin-ppml] [Fwd: ARIN-prop-131: Section 5.0 Legacy Addresses - revised ver. 3] revised ver. 4

[Jeffrey Lyon]

On Thu, Feb 17, 2011 at 3:23 PM, Owen DeLong <owen at delong.com> wrote:
>
> On Feb 17, 2011, at 11:53 AM, John Curran wrote:
>
>> On Feb 17, 2011, at 2:40 PM, William Herrin wrote:
>>>
>>> Can you clarify that? Which global proposal and what was the conflict?
>>
>> As the ARIN Board has already adopted ARIN-2009-3, we need to make
>> sure that 2009-3 (if/when made global) will not conflict.  We can do
>> that by including in pp 131 that no legacy space shall be designated
>> for return to IANA (if that is the intent of the policy proposal).
>>
>> This avoids having 2009-3 somehow become active and we having a conflict
>> in adopted policy in NRPM, and having to establish precedence of various
>> sections, etc.
>>
> 2009-3 provided that ARIN could return legacy space according to policies
> adopted in the ARIN region. Since no such policies exist I don't see a
> conflict between this policy and 2009-3. I do see a conflict between this
> policy and traditional operational practice, but, I would say that policy
> should generally override operational practice if a conflict arises between
> them.
>
> Owen
>
> _______________________________________________
> PPML
> 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:
> http://lists.arin.net/mailman/listinfo/arin-ppml
> Please contact info at arin.net if you experience any issues.
>

An additional comment; I feel that ARIN should act as a steward to
networks within its region, not globally. To this goal, returning
anything to IANA would not make sense.

-- 
Jeffrey Lyon, Leadership Team
jeffrey.lyon at blacklotus.net | http://www.blacklotus.net
Black Lotus Communications - AS32421
First and Leading in DDoS Protection Solutions