[arin-ppml] Internet 101: Collaboration (was - Microsoft receives court approval for transfer as agreed with ARIN)

[Owen DeLong]

On Apr 30, 2011, at 3:27 PM, Chris Grundemann wrote:

> On Thu, Apr 28, 2011 at 20:06, David Conrad <drc at virtualized.org> wrote:
>> Chris,
>> 
>> On Apr 28, 2011, at 11:02 AM, Chris Grundemann wrote:
>>> The Internet is an exercise in collaboration.
>> 
>> Exactly.  Which is why "the ARIN community" (which, just to remind you, consists of maybe a couple of hundred technical folks, a tiny fraction of which participate actively)
> 
> Actually, the ARIN community consists explicitly of everyone within
> the ARIN region (including, but not limited to, legacy address
> holders) and implicitly of anyone in the world who wishes to
> participate.
> 
Technically, you don't have to be within the ARIN region to
participate in the ARIN community.

For example, I live and work in the US. However, I am an
active participant in the ARIN, APNIC, and AfriNIC communities
for policy development.

I am a less active participant in RIPE and LACNIC communities
as well. However, I consider myself part of each of those
communities and my input into their policy process(es) has
always been welcomed.

Anyone who is not involved in any RIR policy process is not
involved of their own choosing or because they are unaware
of their ability to get involved. I am all for making it better known
that people can get involved in the process. I am not for
overriding or destroying the process because of some fictional
claim that people cannot be involved.

>> deciding unilaterally not to collaborate with legacy holders by attempting to force them to submit themselves to a policy regime that goes against their interests, is in my estimation unlikely to be successful.
> 
> I obviously did not make myself clear, let me try again: Fragmentation
> and balkanization of the Internet is against the interests of all who
> use the Internet (including, but not limited to, legacy address
> holders).
> 
Agreed. I think there is a good middle ground to be had. I believe that
the LRSA is good middle ground once it is properly understood. It actually
grants to legacy holders significantly more rights than most RSA signatories
and protects and preserves that status even in the face of overwhelming
community consensus to the contrary.

Absent such an agreement, legacy holders have only the rights
and services from ARIN that the community chooses to tolerate.
I would oppose ARIN engaging in any sort of disruptive or punitive
measures against legacy registrations even those that have not
signed the LRSA, but, I am just one voice. After IPv4 free pool runout,
the overall sentiment of the community may be less calm in relation
to legacy holders and I think they could face real risks.

Owen