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

[Jimmy Hess]

On 6/14/12, Milton L Mueller <mueller at syr.edu> wrote:
>> blocks. Presumably the membership does so because it believes that it is
>> in the best interest of the community and the operation of the internet as a
>> whole to impose such requirements.
> Yes, but I am pretty sure they're wrong, and that it is only a matter of
> time before those opinions, which are based on nostalgia, inertia and faulty
> economics and law, change.
[snip]

What makes you so sure that they would be wrong?
It sounds like you are outright hostile to the community.

> The real question is whether ARIN anticipates changes and is pro-active, or
> whether it is forced into action by external events.

Argumentum ad baculum  is not a very compelling reason to go about
willy-nilly adopting policies to abandon stewardship or redesign
address assignment to cater to economic whims.

> I fully understand why this happens.
> I fully understand that many people on this list sincerely believe that it
> is unfair or unwise to afford legacy holders transferable property rights.

It is both unwise and also unfair to grant legacy holders additional rights
which they do not have and which others are not granted.

> But by refusing to act, they are simply inviting a game of chicken, in which
> one legacy holder chooses to sell outside its process and ARIN retaliates by
> refusing to alter its whois records.

ARIN would have the option of revoking resources once it were demonstrated
that the legacy holder was not using them, and that someone else was.

It is not current policy to do so, but ARIN has that option;  it is therefore
likely that a "buyer" actually intending to use the resources, would find
the lack of WHOIS updating or ability to register their contacts and establish
their reverse DNS server mappings.

It would certainly cause issues getting upstreams to announce those
prefixes; a valid WHOIS listing is generally a pre-requisite.

--
-JH