[arin-ppml] On USG 'granting of rights'

[William Herrin]

On Wed, Jun 3, 2015 at 5:46 PM, Matthew Kaufman <matthew at matthew.at> wrote:
> On 6/3/2015 1:14 PM, William Herrin wrote:
>>
>> Finally: Legacy Registrations. Legacy registrations are not hampered by an
>> ARIN contract - they don't have one. This means a legacy registrant would
>> not have to overcome anything written in the RSA.
>
> As a holder of legacy address space, I really had no interest in having ARIN
> take over the registry that held the records of those assignments, but as
> long as they were correct, I grudgingly accepted that outcome
> (interestingly, ARIN then managed to subsequently change the records for one
> of the blocks even though such a change was never requested.. it actually
> made consolidating my holdings easier, but it shouldn't have happened).


Apropos nothing, I sometimes wonder if it would be worthwhile to set
up a "legacy registry" to maintain all the old out-of-contract address
registrations. ARIN was pretty helpful when LACNIC and AfriNIC wanted
split off. If it was the consensus of the legacy registrants to
operate their own registry, I'd hope ARIN would be reasonably generous
about it. Should even be easier than a normal RIR since a legacy
registry would have no need for number allocations from IANA. And now
that IPv4 addresses have a significant monetary value, I'd like to
think we could find the funding to operate such a registry as well.

That way we could get rid of the periodic legacy v. RSA battles that
infest our policy discussions. The legacy registrants would have
whatever policy they wanted to have at the legacy registrar and that
would be the end of it.

Regards,
Bill Herrin


-- 
William Herrin ................ herrin at dirtside.com  bill at herrin.us
Owner, Dirtside Systems ......... Web: <http://www.dirtside.com/>