[arin-ppml] Deceased Companies

[Ted Mittelstaedt]

1) The US Congress does not have any control over the Internet so they 
can't do squat about this.

2) You are constantly using "take back" in a way that implies these 800 
pound gorillas are a)  in existence   b) actively using the blocks so 
that anyone at the 800 pound gorilla would care enough to pay a lawyer 
for anything.

3) In your last paragraph you switch to using "deceased blocks" which is 
in opposition to your prior implication that blocks would be fought over.

I tire of the hand waving in these discussions.  You assertion that 
there are any numbers of /8's out there that are "deceased" that is, 
nobody is claiming ownership of, and nobody is routing, is ridiculous on 
it's face.

Either a legacy owner wants to keep their assignment and will hire 
lawyers to do it, or they don't give a tinkers damn about it.  NOBODY in
this discussion and in any past discussions regarding Legacy blocks has
ever, to my knowledge, advocated to fight any organization that wants to 
expend effort retaining a legacy block they own.

Every time this discussion comes up there are people who immediately 
rush to conflate legacy blocks that owners want to keep and are willing 
to spend money to keep, with legacy blocks that have owners that don't 
exist anymore, and nobody is willing to spend a cent to "keep"   This 
just serves to send the discussion into a useless rabbithole with people 
arguing over imaginary legal scenarios that have NEVER been proposed.

Please just stop it.

And I'm sorry to make it seem like I'm targeting you, Steven because I 
am not - you are just the latest person to bring up that tired old 
argument that people are trying to "take our IP numbers that we own"

It's a straw man argument and it needs to be retired.  We are trying to 
clean out the cobwebs here not ride into attack a legacy /8 holder like 
Microsoft. SO KNOCK IT OFF!!!!!!

Ted

On 8/6/2022 1:27 PM, Steven Ryerse wrote:
> The many posts to the PPML reflect your desire to somehow reclaim Legacy IPv4 space that isn't being used or space that might have been acquired in a way that is deemed unethical or possibly worse.  As you may know, these subjects have been discussed many many times ad nauseum in this PPML since the time ARIN was formed.  ARIN does pursue transactions that are reported as fraudulent as evidenced by the multiple press releases dealing with fraud and the courts - that have been described in press releases in recent years shared on the PPML - so it appears the desire to follow up such reports is already a function that ARIN pursues when appropriate.  I've seen each press release describing these cases have been applauded by many in this community and I applaud them as well.
> 
> With all due respect, as for reclaiming Legacy blocks - some of those original Class A blocks (/8's) were awarded to 800 pound gorillas with unlimited deep pockets to pay their on-staff attorneys. I haven’t looked at the list lately but there were organizations like AT&T, IBM, Ford and even the Department of Defense had at least two /8’s - and if I recall Great Britain was awarded two /8’s back then. These all were legacy blocks awarded in the very early 90’s when the internet was new and the National Science Foundation was trying to gain acceptance of wider usage of the fledgling Internet.
> 
> So at least some of these gorillas still have their blocks and I haven’t researched it, but at least some have never signed any legal agreement with ARIN since they got these blocks before ARIN existed - and they got them without any legalese written agreements that pertained to the blocks assigned to them.
> 
> So if ARIN decided one day they are going to go after all of these blocks some of which are “unused” ipv4 blocks, then they would likely end up in court against an army of talented attorneys. This is not a desirable nor a positive situation for ARIN to be in.
> 
> ARIN has to treat all legacy holders the same whether they were Class A or Class B or Class C. So I would support ARIN contacting all legacy holders in a positive manner that have not signed an agreement to see if any would voluntarily release unused resources and/or sign an agreement.  The key words in the last sentence is voluntary and positive.  However trying to take back any legacy resources by force without a signed ARIN agreement in place, or without the permission of the organization or individual the resources were awarded to doesn't make practical sense - and is fraught with possible negative consequences for ARIN.
> 
> For the ARIN region, the only realistic way to change the dynamics and relationship between ARIN and Legacy holders without agreements would be for the US Congress to act, and this is possible but unlikely.
> 
> Others have described the situation of Legacy Holders in the PPML as a horse that has already left the barn, and adding the fact that these 800 pound gorillas exist with their army of attorneys, short of an act of the US Congress - that horse isn't ever going back into the barn.  Better we as a community should focus on moving the Internet forward in a positive manner than get caught up with trying to somehow chase a horse we can never catch.  ARIN can of course try and contact legacy holders that are reported as "Deceased" but if they cannot reach anyone for confirmation then we will all just have to live with that block being out of usage.  Those "deceased" blocks are not causing our organization or our customers any problems we can't overcome ourselves so we don't spend any time worrying about them.  I realize the cost of IPv4 addresses keeps going up, but just as we pass along the cost of gasoline to our customers, we pass the cost of IPv4 addresses on to them as well as a cost of conducting business.
> 
> I'm not in favor of chasing horse we can't catch.  My two cents.  😉
> 
> 
> Steven Ryerse
> President & CEO
> 
> sryerse at eclipse-networks.com | 770.399.9099 ext. 502
> 100 Ashford Center North | Suite 110 | Atlanta, Georgia 30338
> 
> 
> 
> -----Original Message-----
> From: ARIN-PPML <arin-ppml-bounces at arin.net> On Behalf Of Ronald F. Guilmette
> Sent: Wednesday, June 1, 2022 3:30 AM
> To: arin-ppml at arin.net
> Subject: Re: [arin-ppml] Deceased Companies
> 
> _______________________________________________
> 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.