[arin-ppml] ARIN-prop-172 Additional definition for NRPM Section 2 - Legacy Resources

[Owen DeLong]

On Jun 5, 2012, at 1:17 PM, Martin Hannigan wrote:

> This works for me.
> 
> 
> Anyone else have a constructive suggestion before I submit a final revision?
> 
> 
> 
> On Tue, Jun 5, 2012 at 4:12 PM, Lindsey, Marc <mlindsey at lb3law.com> wrote:
>> Owen – I’m not up to the task of convincing you to change your beliefs about
>> the nature of the rights (or lack of rights) embodied in legacy numbers.   I
>> will simply point out that the proposed policy at issue (i.e., establishing
>> a definition for legacy resources) is itself an acknowledgment that there
>> is, in practice, a meaningful distinction between legacy and non-legacy
>> numbers.
>> 
>> 

1.	I haven't expressed support (or opposition for that matter) to the proposal.

2.	Recognizing that the resources have a murkier registration status does
	not inherently imbue them or their holders with any difference in rights
	or obligations from other resources or their holders.

>> I accept the constructive criticism regarding the structure of my proposed
>> revision to the definition.  I’ve restated it below in a way that,
>> hopefully, is more readable:
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> A legacy resource is an IPv4 address or Autonomous System Number that
>> satisfies both of the following two criteria:
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> (1)    it was issued to an entity (other than a Regional Internet Registry)
>> or individual (the “original legacy holder”) prior to ARIN's inception on
>> Dec 22, 1997 either by an organization authorized by the United States to
>> perform the Internet Assigned Numbers Authority (“IANA”) functions or an
>> Internet Registry; and
>> 

Still murky. Does this mean that individuals cannot hold legacy resources,
or are you intending to include individuals as eligible entities in which case,
the use of the word entity at the beginning of the sentence is sufficient and
the words "or individual" should be stricken.

If your intent is to exclude individuals, then that would be a pretty radical
departure from existing practice wrt legacy holders.

>> (2)    it has not been returned to a Regional Internet Registry under a
>> binding written agreement between the original legacy holder (or its legal
>> successor or assign) and the RIR for subsequent allocation and assignment in
>> accordance with such RIR’s number resource policies and membership (or
>> service) agreements.

So this would preserve legacy status for resources transferred and brought
under RSA through section 8.2, which I think is incorrect.

Additionally, some resources are returned without necessarily having what
would meet the legal test of "under a binding written agreement between the
original legacy holder..."

This would also, potentially, create a much greater difficulty for ARIN to
reclaim abandoned legacy resources which I think is contrary to the interests
of the community.

Owen

>> 
>> 
>> 
>> -Marc
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> From: Owen DeLong [mailto:owen at delong.com]
>> 
>> Sent: Tuesday, June 05, 2012 3:26 PM
>> To: Lindsey, Marc
>> Cc: 'arin-ppml at arin.net'
>> Subject: Re: [arin-ppml] ARIN-prop-172 Additional definition for NRPM
>> Section 2 - Legacy Resources
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> On Jun 5, 2012, at 12:06 PM, Lindsey, Marc wrote:
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> I support creating a definition in the NRPM of legacy resources so that
>> future policy proposals can properly acknowledge and address the distinction
>> between the bundle of rights associated with legacy numbers and the
>> specifically defined contract rights attributable to non-legacy resources.
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> What distinction would that be?
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> I remain unconvinced that any such distinction exists other than some
>> ability to remain static and not pay fees.
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> I would , however, suggest some revisions to the definition as proposed.
>> The revised definition is as follows:
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> A legacy resource is an IPv4 address or Autonomous System Number that (a)
>> was issued to an entity (other than a Regional Internet Registry) or
>> individual (the “original legacy holder”) prior to ARIN's inception on Dec
>> 22, 1997 either by an organization authorized by the United States to
>> perform the Internet Assigned Numbers Authority (“IANA”) functions or an
>> Internet Registry, and (b) has not been returned to a Regional Internet
>> Registry under a binding written agreement between the original legacy
>> holder (or its legal successor or assign) and the RIR for subsequent
>> allocation and assignment in accordance with such RIR’s number resource
>> policies and membership (or service) agreements.
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> That's a very complex and difficult to parse runon sentence.
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> As much as it pains me to do so, I have to agree with Milton that the best
>> definition is: "Legacy allocations/assignments are those
>> allocations/assignments maintained in the ARIN database not covered by any
>> form of RSA between ARIN and the recipient."
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> 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.
> _______________________________________________
> 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.