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

[William Herrin]

On Tue, Apr 8, 2014 at 3:54 AM, John Curran <jcurran at arin.net> wrote:
> Probably best to refer to RFC 2050, since your resources were managed
> by the InterNIC at that time, and RFC 2050 states: "This document
> describes the IP assignment policies currently used by the Regional
> Registries to implement the guidelines developed by the IANA."  That
> does seem to answer your question regarding the operative procedures
> of the day.

Hi John,

Not really, no. My question was about procedures followed in practice,
not policies that might or might not have been derived from RFC2050
and might or might not have been followed by NSI acting as Internic
(not an RIR) in the last few months leading up to ARIN's inception.


> You first argued that ARIN promised to maintain old allocations with
> no policy changes, and subsequently (upon seeing that the actual policy
> directly supports needs-assessment for transfers) changed your argument
> to say that no policy at all is applicable to old resources...  I am
> fairly you can't argue both sides at the same time, so which is it?

Your honor, my client has never even touched a gun and if he has he
didn't shoot anybody and if he did it was surely self defense.

ARIN has no authority to regulate the legacy registrations. If it did,
that authority would be constrained to a conservative reading of the
template and process used to register those addresses or, at the
absolute most, a reading of RFC 2050 with all ambiguity construed in
the registrants' most favorable light.

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