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

[Avri Doria]

Hi,

Thanks for the clear explanation of this point of view. As a legacy holder I appreciate it. 
(oh and thanks to all those who gave me advice on how to get my /24 routed, I will try again)

I have a question:

Does the community keep the registry becasue it is the authority or becasue as stewards it thinks keeping a registry is a good thing?

If the former, it makes sense to have a set of rules that you try to enforce.  And I think you are probably right; nothing at this point requires you to provide service to those who don't follow your rules. You probably can't stop them, but you don't have to serve them. But as you say IANL, and I do not know about any rulings or whatever, that might contradict this.  

But if it is the later, i.e. it ARIN acts as stewards in the best interests of the IPv4 Internet and registration is a good thing, then would it also be a good thing to allow for registration of transfered addresses even if the method of transfer wasn't one that fell within your approved transfer policy framework?

thanks

avri


Kevin Kargel <kkargel at polartel.com> wrote:

>
>
>Please bear with me here as I want to make sure I understand what is
>going
>on.  
>
>I believe that pretty much everybody supports the legacy holders and
>their
>ability to maintain and use the IPv4 address space that was assigned to
>them
>pre-ARIN.  Nobody (that I am aware of) is trying to invalidate that
>assignment or reclaim the space from the original assignees.
>
>These assignments, were (IMHO) just that, assignments, not gifts or
>grants
>or deeds or titles. 
> 
>Please educate me if any of my assertions above are incorrect or
>invalid.
>
>What I am seeing from the community is that if the original assignees
>want
>to transfer the assignment to another party then the community asserts
>that
>the transfer should comply with current in force policy.  It is
>possible I
>am not completely understanding this point.
>
>If you look through past communications I have often tried to act as a
>champion of legacy holders and I will continue to do so in the future.
>I am
>not now a legacy holder. I will vigorously oppose any action that tries
>to
>invalidate any original and legitimate assignment of space to the user
>it
>was originally assigned to.
>
>I think there are several red herrings being chased up tributaries in
>an
>attempt to undermine ARIN or otherwise cause chaos.  I suspect that the
>motivation has little to do with the actual issues being discussed.
>
>I am firmly convinced that if a "legacy holder" wants to work with ARIN
>to
>straighten out records ARIN will go above and beyond the call to make
>things
>right and protect the assignment as originally created so that the
>networks
>involved operate as seamlessly as possible.  
>This would be a no risk effort for the legacy holder, as that if it
>doesn't
>pan out they could walk away and be right where they started and out
>only
>the effort of trying.
>
>Thanks to all and I apologize if this wasted anyone's time.  I truly
>hope it
>does not muddy the waters further.  
>
>Kevin Kargel
>(personal assertions only)
>_______________________________________________
>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.