<html><head><meta http-equiv="content-type" content="text/html; charset=utf-8"></head><body dir="auto"><div><br></div><blockquote type="cite"><div><br>
<blockquote cite="mid:CAC4yj2X5RemO1rMQ35Q-LWBAri4Vim41Y4OuEwaV6BhANq6jyQ@mail.gmail.com" type="cite">
<div dir="ltr">
<div>
<div style=""><span style="font-family:arial,sans-serif;font-size:13.333333969116211px"><br>
</span></div>
RFC-2050 3.1 says:<br>
<br>
"IP addresses are valid as long as the criteria continues to
be met."</div>
</div>
</blockquote>
<br>
One might construe this statement to directly invalidate existing
legacy allocations which would now be in ARIN's policy through this
policy. Others might be worried that this opens the door wider to
changing policy to retroactively revoke allocations or assignments
by changing "criteria". Furthermore, I believe this idea is
already handled by existing NRPM text and the RSA.<br>
<br>
<blockquote cite="mid:CAC4yj2X5RemO1rMQ35Q-LWBAri4Vim41Y4OuEwaV6BhANq6jyQ@mail.gmail.com" type="cite">
<div dir="ltr">
<div>
<div style="">
<pre style="word-wrap:break-word"></pre></div></div></div></blockquote></div></blockquote><div><br></div>Whether one construes it that way or not, the reality is that said statement has always applied to resource allocations/assignments even back when it was just kept in Jon Postel's notebook.<div><br></div><div>As such, I support preserving that statement in the ARIN policy proposal.</div><div><br></div><div>Owen</div><div><br></div></body></html>