[arin-ppml] ARIN-PPML Digest, Vol 106, Issue 8 (Sandra Brown)
David.Huberman at microsoft.com
Mon Apr 7 10:44:57 EDT 2014
2014-9 (about resolving the conflict between NRPM 8.2 and the RSA) is the first step towards this goal.
David R Huberman
Senior IT/OPS Program Manager (GFS)
From: arin-ppml-bounces at arin.net <arin-ppml-bounces at arin.net> on behalf of CJ Aronson <cja at daydream.com>
Sent: Monday, April 7, 2014 7:37:06 AM
To: Milton L Mueller
Cc: John Curran; arin-ppml at arin.net; sandrabrown at ipv4marketgroup.com
Subject: Re: [arin-ppml] ARIN-PPML Digest, Vol 106, Issue 8 (Sandra Brown)
Milton if someone wants "ARIN to ease it's needs assessment requirements for transfers" then there has to be a policy proposal submitted that gains community support. ARIN can't just change this without the process being followed. In the past the policies to ease needs assessment have not gained community support but things change so who knows.
On Mon, Apr 7, 2014 at 8:17 AM, Milton L Mueller <mueller at syr.edu<mailto:mueller at syr.edu>> wrote:
> -----Original Message-----
> To the extent that the community feels that registry policy should be
> applicable in general to the management of address blocks in the region,
> then the rights afforded to address holders must definitely be a subset of
> what most folks would consider "property rights." In particular, to the extent
I think the real issue is whether ARIN has any rights claims over number block holders it does not have a contract with. RIPE seems to have foregone any such claims. The sky has not fallen in Europe.
> absent any change in
> direction, ARIN must hold to the position set at its establishment and its in
> foundational documents that all address space in the registry is subject to
> community-develop number resource policy.
Not sure I buy the assertion that these principles were in the foundational documents; why did you need to add this language later? The 'no property rights' language came very late in the day.
> > Perhaps at some point some party with more at stake, will force the
> > property right issue in court,
> That actually could be quite beneficial, as would help in providing further
> certainty regarding the ability of ARIN to maintain the registry per the wishes
> and policies developed by the community. Parties without any agreement
I think it would be easier for everyone if ARIN would just ease its needs-assessment requirements for transfers. The whole threat of litigation could be dissipated in a week if this happened.
You are receiving this message because you are subscribed to
the ARIN Public Policy Mailing List (ARIN-PPML at arin.net<mailto:ARIN-PPML at arin.net>).
Unsubscribe or manage your mailing list subscription at:
Please contact info at arin.net<mailto:info at arin.net> if you experience any issues.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
More information about the ARIN-PPML