[arin-ppml] Draft Proposal for Needs-Free IPv4 Transfers

[Matthew Kaufman]

On May 9, 2011, at 1:34 PM, Ted Mittelstaedt wrote:

> 
> In my opinion, the FACT that none of the Legacy holders, when they
> needed additional resources, have attempted to just pull numbers out
> of their ass, but instead have in fact gone to the RIR's for more
> numbers, means that in effect the concept of "adverse possession"
> has happened.
> 
> In short, the RIR's have exerted authority over the IP space, and
> for the last decade none of the Legacy holders have disputed this,
> and as a result, the Legacy holders have lost whatever rights that they
> might have had to dispute RIR control of the ENTIRE IPv4 & IPv6 space.

That isn't how it works.

If I put a fence around a 10 acre corner of your 100-acre plot and you don't object to the fence, then after some years I can claim adverse possession over the 10 acres... not your entire 100-acre plot.

> 
> Thus I believe that even though the right of ARIN to pull IPv4 numbers
> from Legacy holders is not enumerated in the NRPM, that under most
> legal systems they do have that right today, simply because none of
> the Legacy holders have attempted to deny them that over the last decade.

None of the legacy holders have attempted to deny them the ability to assign from the unassigned space... but that's difference.

And none of this matters if the address space *isn't* property.

Matthew Kaufman