[arin-ppml] [EXT] Re: Open Petition for ARIN-prop-266: BGP Hijacking is an ARIN Policy Violation
JORDI PALET MARTINEZ
jordi.palet at consulintel.es
Thu May 2 11:46:36 EDT 2019
El 2/5/19 17:36, "ARIN-PPML en nombre de William Herrin" <arin-ppml-bounces at arin.net en nombre de bill at herrin.us> escribió:
On Wed, May 1, 2019 at 11:50 PM Fernando Frediani <fhfrediani at gmail.com> wrote:
Why people always believe they "own" IP address space and nobody can
take it from them as if it was a router or a server purchased with a
invoice and declared in their annual balance ?
1. Revocation of a properly registered address space has never happened before, at least not in North America. The few times any sort of revocation
It will be nice to know that with real information from the ARIN staff.
I’ve confirmed with RIPE and LACNIC staff that there have been cases.
has happened is when there was provable fraud in the -original- application, ownership was claimed by someone who was provably acting without the authorization of the original registrant, or periodic registratino fees consented to under written contract with ARIN were not paid for an extended period of time. Over ARIN's existence there have been plenty of opportunities for ARIN to revoke addresses for other bad behaviors including violations of the policy manual. They have always declined to do so.
If this is the case, it is quite alarming. I fully agree to give opportunities, but up to a certain point.
The legal Doctrine of Laches more or less says that a right not enforced is a right you do not have, regardless of writings to the contrary. ARIN has never enforced a claim incompatible with the registrants' ownership of their IP addresses.
2. Prior to 1997, the documents associated with registration neither expressed nor implied any right for the registry to revoke a registration for any reason.
3. If it quacks like a duck, it's a duck. The registrant has exclusive control of the block of the number resource to the extent that use by anyone else on the Internet is universally held to be abusive. They can be sold or rented without permission or attachment and bought with minimal registration paperwork (or none if you're willing to operate on a contract with the averred registrant rather than updating the registration). Addresses are used in a manner that closely aligns with the common law understanding of an intellectual property. For a court to find otherwise, a litigant would have to affirmatively prove that this thing which quacks like a duck is in fact a zebra. This has not been done and there is reason to believe it is not doable.
I think having an *explicit policy text* will help to victims to claim in courts, not just to avoid that happening, but for possible damages when it happened already.
That's why folks like me believe we own our IP addresses.
Which I don’t agree, is a use-right, while you follow the rules, that’s why I think they should be clearer.
William Herrin ................ herrin at dirtside.com bill at herrin.us
Dirtside Systems ......... Web: <http://www.dirtside.com/>
_______________________________________________ ARIN-PPML You are receiving this message because you are subscribed to the ARIN Public Policy Mailing List (ARIN-PPML at arin.net). Unsubscribe or manage your mailing list subscription at: https://lists.arin.net/mailman/listinfo/arin-ppml Please contact info at arin.net if you experience any issues.
IPv4 is over
Are you ready for the new Internet ?
The IPv6 Company
This electronic message contains information which may be privileged or confidential. The information is intended to be for the exclusive use of the individual(s) named above and further non-explicilty authorized disclosure, copying, distribution or use of the contents of this information, even if partially, including attached files, is strictly prohibited and will be considered a criminal offense. If you are not the intended recipient be aware that any disclosure, copying, distribution or use of the contents of this information, even if partially, including attached files, is strictly prohibited, will be considered a criminal offense, so you must reply to the original sender to inform about this communication and delete it.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
More information about the ARIN-PPML