[arin-ppml] ARIN-PPML Digest, Vol 106, Issue 8 (Sandra Brown)

[William Herrin]

On Mon, Apr 7, 2014 at 1:29 PM, John Curran <jcurran at arin.net> wrote:
> On Apr 7, 2014, at 12:59 PM, William Herrin <bill at herrin.us> wrote:
>
>> "Current and old allocations and their DNS will be maintained with no
>> policy changes"
>
> Note that RFC 2050 was operative at that time, with language requiring the
> recipient to meet the same criteria as when qualifying to receive space; i.e.
> Even under your assertions above, legacy holders doing transfers would be
> still be subject to needs qualification of the recipient.

Hi John,

I don't recall being asked to reference or agree to RFC 2050 in the
template I submitted for my legacy block. Doubtless in part because
RFC 2050 hadn't yet been written. RFC2050 really isn't informative in
the manner you imply.

As I recollect the operative procedures of the day, it was: resend the
template with the new information which, as an existing registration
submitting a template from an authorized source, was honored without
further review. Does your recollection of the pre-ARIN administrative
procedures for transferring a block of network addresses differ?

This is a messy, messy court case if the matter ever comes to a head.
Does article 1 section 8 bar the existence of a intangible property
that congress hasn't defined? If it can exist, the registration
documents and process looked pretty permanent -- exactly as you'd
expect for a grant of property. But they didn't directly speak to the
question, either for or against. Highfalutin' and late-to-the-game
RFCs notwithstanding. But even if legacy addresses are property, does
ARIN have a perpetual obligation to _record_ changes to ownership? And
provide RDNS for free? But if ARIN obstructs anyone else from
providing RDNS, does that unlawfully encroach the property? And if
addresses are property, what are the antitrust implications for ARIN
asserting ownership of all the addresses it allocated since its
inception? Leasehold property is un-American; it was a major driver
(beside religion) in the population's original exodus from Europe. Our
law tends to view it with suspicion.

Messy. Best bet for everyone involved is to arrange for the matter to
never come to a head. Let the eventual deployment of IPv6 render it
moot.

Regards,
Bill Herrin


-- 
William D. Herrin ................ herrin at dirtside.com  bill at herrin.us
3005 Crane Dr. ...................... Web: <http://bill.herrin.us/>
Falls Church, VA 22042-3004