[arin-ppml] FYI -- RIPE-605 Services to LegacyInternetResourceHolders

[Steven Ryerse]

I understand your concern and even share it to a point but we need to deal with real life, and real life is that it is pretty unlikely to get all of the original /8 and other large block legacy holders to sign contracts with ARIN (not to mention the small legacy block holders).  

Do you really think that ALL of the AT&Ts & Verizons and Fords - not to mention the DOD - and all of the other fortune 1000 companies that hold large legacy blocks are going to sign agreements. 

No one can force them to and no one should try and force them.  This goes for the thousands of organizations that got Class C blocks as well.  Real life is that they all exist and ARIN has no direct legal authority over them.  

It is just time to stop playing like these legacy holders don't exist and bring them into the community without requiring them to do anything and I think the RIP 605 does just that.  My two cents.  

Steven L Ryerse
President
100 Ashford Center North, Suite 110, Atlanta, GA  30338
770.656.1460 - Cell
770.399.9099 - Office
770.392-0076 - Fax

℠ Eclipse Networks, Inc.
                     Conquering Complex Networks℠

-----Original Message-----
From: Morizot Timothy S [mailto:Timothy.S.Morizot at irs.gov] 
Sent: Thursday, February 13, 2014 5:24 PM
To: Steven Ryerse; 'Owen DeLong'; David Conrad
Cc: John Curran; arin-ppml at arin.net
Subject: RE: [arin-ppml] FYI -- RIPE-605 Services to LegacyInternetResourceHolders

Steven L Ryerse wrote:
>I think that the new RIPE policy is acknowledging this reality and I 
>think ARIN adopting the same identical policy makes sense because it 
>would allow the coming together of Legacy holders and ARIN allocations holders which I think is in everyone's interest.
>
>Note that I would expect ARIN to be able to request and receive proof 
>of a completed transaction before they update their database with the new information.

Interesting. So you believe it's in the interest of those of us who have signed RSAs and LRSAs to subsidize (through our annual fees) those who want free registry services even though they refuse to adhere to the number resource policy in our region. That policy, in part, requires that the recipient of a legacy resource transfer, who  by definition cannot be a legacy allocation recipient, sign an RSA and contribute toward the cost of providing those registry services.

That's an interesting perspective, but I'm not sure I agree. ARIN can't really control use and advertisement of resources, but if someone who isn't a pre-ARIN legacy recipient expects to receive registry services, I'm okay with requiring them to sign an RSA and pay for those services.

Scott