Having followed the list discussion thus far, I am totally opposed to this proposal 172 ....and with reference to John Santos' remarks below .<i>"See the template we needed to fill out in order to receive our initial legacy assignment back in the early 1990s"</i>.........Maybe John should digitize the template. <br>
Rudi Daniel<br><br><div class="gmail_quote"><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex">
<br>
On Tue, 12 Jun 2012, Milton L Mueller wrote:<br>
<br>
> > -----Original Message-----<br>
> > From: Paul Vixie [mailto:<a href="mailto:paul@redbarn.org">paul@redbarn.org</a>]<br>
><br>
> > if you're aware of "trades" which are not futures or options, and which<br>
> > reflect the extant desire of some operators to put into active use<br>
> > address resources whose need they cannot currently justify, i'm all<br>
> > ears, please regale me.<br>
><br>
> [Milton L Mueller] See above. I guess you have forgotten the context of<br>
> this discussion. There is a policy proposal to define legacy resources in<br>
> a specific way. Opponents of this new definition have insisted that ARIN<br>
> holds rights over the exchange of those resources and are rejecting the<br>
> proposed definition because of that.<br>
<br>
This is a strawman. That is not the only or even the common reason why<br>
at least some people oppose this proposal. 1) It codifies practices and<br>
applies retroactively in a way inconsistant with current and previous<br>
practice, in that requires a written agreement. 2) It extends the scope<br>
ot "legacy" status well beyond the current de facto situation. 3) It<br>
ignores that despite the lack or a written RSA, there was an understanding<br>
between ARIN's predecessors and address holders that the addresses were<br>
to be used for network numbering and management, were issued on a needs<br>
basis, and were to be returned or reallocated if the holder's needs<br>
changed. See the template we needed to fill out in order to receive our<br>
initial legacy assignment back in the early 1990s. (I only have this on<br>
paper so can't link to it.)<br>
<br>
The "definition" in this proposal is actually policy in sheep's clothing.<br>
<br>
Opposed.<br>
<br>
--<br>
John Santos<br>
Evans Griffiths & Hart, Inc.<br>
<a href="tel:781-861-0670%20ext%20539" value="+17818610670">781-861-0670 ext 539</a><br>
<br>
<br>
<br>
<br>
------------------------------<br>
<br>
Message: 6<br>
Date: Tue, 12 Jun 2012 13:51:33 +0000<br>
From: Milton L Mueller <<a href="mailto:mueller@syr.edu">mueller@syr.edu</a>><br>
To: Jo Rhett <<a href="mailto:jrhett@netconsonance.com">jrhett@netconsonance.com</a>>, "<a href="mailto:arin-ppml@arin.net">arin-ppml@arin.net</a>"<br>
<<a href="mailto:ARIN-PPML@arin.net">ARIN-PPML@arin.net</a>><br>
Subject: Re: [arin-ppml] ARIN-prop-171 Section<br>
8.4Modifications:ASNandlegacy resources<br>
Message-ID:<br>
<<a href="mailto:855077AC3D7A7147A7570370CA01ECD2187731@SUEX10-mbx-10.ad.syr.edu">855077AC3D7A7147A7570370CA01ECD2187731@SUEX10-mbx-10.ad.syr.edu</a>><br>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"<br>
<br>
Jo, glad to see you back away from the "psychotic" remark.<br>
<br>
As for confusion about what property is, it is well accepted among political economists that there can be property rights in intangible assets. A property right is defined in economics as the right to exclude, the right to use and the benefit from the use, and the right to trade or assign to others.<br>
<br>
So to shift slightly to another context, you think that telephone number portability plans, which facilitated competition by giving end users a property right in their number, allowing them to move them from carrier to carrier, was a bad thing? After all, a telephone number "allows you to receive [calls] and for others to find you" and thus conforms exactly to your definition of an address.<br>
<br>
By the way, whether the community can take away property rights has nothing to do with whether the rights are property rights or whether it is a good thing to assign them in the first place. E.g., in certain countries tanks claiming the mandate from "the community" can arrive at your door and expropriate your land. Doesn't mean your land isn't property, doesn't mean it's the right thing to do.<br>
<br>
> -----Original Message-----<br>
> I think that this conversation demonstrates some deep confusion over<br>
> what property is.<br>
><br>
> Property: are those tangible assets that you own. You know, the hardware<br>
> you use to provide the service on. You bought them. This stuff is not<br>
> unlike a house, or perhaps one could argue, a mobile home.<br>
><br>
> Address: is that thing you get from the community which allows you to<br>
> receive mail, and for others to find you. And the community can vote to<br>
> change it. And does, not often, but perhaps more often than many people<br>
> expect.<br>
><br>
> I find it totally amusing that "allows you to receive mail, and for<br>
> others to find you" amazingly sums up both the real uses of physical and<br>
> IP address ;-) But neither one is owned, and both can be changed or<br>
> even taken away if the community votes to do so.<br>
><br>
> --<br>
> Jo Rhett<br>
> Net Consonance : net philanthropy to improve open source and internet<br>
> projects.<br>
><br>
><br>
><br>
> _______________________________________________<br>
> PPML<br>
> You are receiving this message because you are subscribed to<br>
> the ARIN Public Policy Mailing List (<a href="mailto:ARIN-PPML@arin.net">ARIN-PPML@arin.net</a>).<br>
> Unsubscribe or manage your mailing list subscription at:<br>
> <a href="http://lists.arin.net/mailman/listinfo/arin-ppml" target="_blank">http://lists.arin.net/mailman/listinfo/arin-ppml</a><br>
> Please contact <a href="mailto:info@arin.net">info@arin.net</a> if you experience any issues.<br>
<br>
<br>
------------------------------<br>
<br>
Message: 7<br>
Date: Tue, 12 Jun 2012 13:54:39 +0000<br>
From: Milton L Mueller <<a href="mailto:mueller@syr.edu">mueller@syr.edu</a>><br>
To: John Santos <<a href="mailto:JOHN@egh.com">JOHN@egh.com</a>><br>
Cc: "'<a href="mailto:arin-ppml@arin.net">arin-ppml@arin.net</a>'" <<a href="mailto:arin-ppml@arin.net">arin-ppml@arin.net</a>><br>
Subject: Re: [arin-ppml] ARIN-prop-172 Additional definition for NRPM<br>
Section 2 - Legacy Resources<br>
Message-ID:<br>
<<a href="mailto:855077AC3D7A7147A7570370CA01ECD218776E@SUEX10-mbx-10.ad.syr.edu">855077AC3D7A7147A7570370CA01ECD218776E@SUEX10-mbx-10.ad.syr.edu</a>><br>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"<br>
<br>
<br>
<br>
> -----Original Message-----<br>
> > [Milton L Mueller] See above. I guess you have forgotten the context<br>
> > of this discussion. There is a policy proposal to define legacy<br>
> > resources in a specific way. Opponents of this new definition have<br>
> > insisted that ARIN holds rights over the exchange of those resources<br>
> > and are rejecting the proposed definition because of that.<br>
><br>
> This is a strawman. That is not the only or even the common reason why<br>
> at least some people oppose this proposal. 1) It codifies practices and<br>
> applies retroactively in a way inconsistant with current and previous<br>
> practice, in that requires a written agreement.<br>
<br>
[Milton L Mueller] huh? ARIN has no authority other than its written agreements.<br>
<br>
> 2) It extends the scope<br>
> ot "legacy" status well beyond the current de facto situation.<br>
<br>
[Milton L Mueller] debatable.<br>
<br>
> 3) It ignores that despite the lack or a written RSA, there was an<br>
> understanding between ARIN's predecessors and address holders that the<br>
> addresses were to be used for network numbering and management, were<br>
> issued on a needs basis, and were to be returned or reallocated if the<br>
> holder's needs changed.<br>
<br>
[Milton L Mueller] utterly false, factually. The legacy allocations made in the 1980s did not carry any such implications, you are reading current policies and obligations backwards into history.<br>
<br>
<br>
<br>
------------------------------<br>
<br>
_______________________________________________<br>
ARIN-PPML mailing list<br>
<a href="mailto:ARIN-PPML@arin.net">ARIN-PPML@arin.net</a><br>
<a href="http://lists.arin.net/mailman/listinfo/arin-ppml" target="_blank">http://lists.arin.net/mailman/listinfo/arin-ppml</a><br>
<br>
End of ARIN-PPML Digest, Vol 84, Issue 31<br>
*****************************************<br>
</blockquote><br></div><br><br clear="all"><br>-- <br><img src="http://api.ning.com/files/60Dc*7fMSnOD5inYWvnElhieb2y*e2O798iHVa48vgYOJUmz33g1MSmWAGQs0M2C7g4LXqAu0KvJ0c99k3kSouZfig33AnNo/emaillogo.jpg" height="61" width="58"><br>
<div>Rudi Daniel<div><i><a href="http://www.facebook.com/pages/Kingstown-Saint-Vincent-and-the-Grenadines/DanielCharles/153611257984774" target="_blank">danielcharles consulting</a><br></i><b><span style="font-size:large"><font color="#006600"><br>
</font></span></b></div><div><font color="#006600"><span style="font-size:large"><b><br></b></span></font><div><span style="font-size:large"><br></span></div></div></div><br>