[arin-ppml] Deceased Companies?

[Paul E McNary]

Legacy Resources do not have fees to ARIN if not under LRSA, correct? 
" compliance with policy " is a double edged sword. 
You do have an "Inside The Beltway" use of the US English language :-) 


From: "John Curran" <jcurran at arin.net> 
To: "pmcnary" <pmcnary at cameron.net> 
Cc: "arin-ppml" <arin-ppml at arin.net> 
Sent: Monday, July 25, 2022 11:46:31 AM 
Subject: Re: [arin-ppml] Deceased Companies? 

Paul - 

That’s quite strange, since we’d already had estates probated with number resources at that time. 

Rights to number resources are not “freely held property” but rather similar to any other contractual right - 
i.e. if you are running an operation that using IP address blocks and it passes to your heir, there’s not 
reason that the IP address blocks could not pass as part of the assignment of the contract. 

If you were somehow suggesting that the rights to the address blocks in the registry could pass absent the 
corresponding contractual obligations such as the payment of fees, compliance with policy, then indeed 
I probably said “not possible.” 

Thanks! 
/John 

John Curran 
President and CEO 
American Registry for Internet Numbers 





On 25 Jul 2022, at 12:22 PM, Paul E McNary < [ mailto:pmcnary at cameron.net | pmcnary at cameron.net ] > wrote: 

It was you John Curran at WISPAMERICA when it was at Louisville I think. 
So Legacy Resources or any Resources remain with the Estate, That is excellent to know! 
At the time your argument was that Number Resources were not property that could be probated. 
Your view was that Number Resources were not property at all. They could be assigned but not possessed. 
You were very clear about it. 


From: "John Curran" < [ mailto:jcurran at arin.net | jcurran at arin.net ] > 
To: "Fernando Frediani" < [ mailto:fhfrediani at gmail.com | fhfrediani at gmail.com ] > 
Cc: "arin-ppml" < [ mailto:arin-ppml at arin.net | arin-ppml at arin.net ] > 
Sent: Monday, July 25, 2022 11:07:21 AM 
Subject: Re: [arin-ppml] Deceased Companies? 




BQ_BEGIN

On 25 Jul 2022, at 11:48 AM, Fernando Frediani < [ mailto:fhfrediani at gmail.com | fhfrediani at gmail.com ] > wrote: 



Thank you very much for the clarification John. 

It is good to know that there has been a policy in the past for that to happen and that BoT has understood that although ARIN could be successor of SRI/GSI/NSI-InterNIC it would not make sense in the current or even past context at that point in time these resources to be retained by ARIN. 


Your opinion on the matter is noted. I shall not opine on the view of the ARIN Board on 
hypotheticals but will observe that ARIN has been responsible the overwhelming majority 
of space returned the IANA IPv4 free pool. 

BQ_BEGIN




One point to highlight is that the communication mentions "blocks that have been voluntarily returned to ARIN" which could be understood as basically any legacy blocks had necessarily to be returned to ARIN and that IANA agrees on that or if a given legacy resource holder wishes to return it directly to IANA would it be forbidden and directed by IANA to do to ARIN ? 

BQ_END
Legacy resource holders in the ARIN registry must return their resources to ARIN. 

Thanks, 
/John 

John Curran 
President and CEO 
American Registry for Internet Numbers 

_______________________________________________ 
ARIN-PPML 
You are receiving this message because you are subscribed to 
the ARIN Public Policy Mailing List ( [ mailto:ARIN-PPML at arin.net | ARIN-PPML at arin.net ] ). 
Unsubscribe or manage your mailing list subscription at: 
[ https://lists.arin.net/mailman/listinfo/arin-ppml | https://lists.arin.net/mailman/listinfo/arin-ppml ] 
Please contact info at arin.net if you experience any issues. 

BQ_END



-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://lists.arin.net/pipermail/arin-ppml/attachments/20220725/e7dbe448/attachment.htm>