Clay at exodus.net
Wed Jan 10 14:47:44 EST 2001
the rules have been changed before and they can be changed again. Time has
never been a limiting fact in updating policies or rules..ESPECIALLY if
those rules change due to NECESSITY. The lawyers can sue all they want, but
if they do there is a risk that we could indeed run out of IP address
space...Then the rules won't account for anything and desperate measures
will override ANY grandfather clause you can think of.
From: Justin W. Newton [mailto:justin at gid.net]
Sent: Wednesday, January 10, 2001 9:22 AM
To: Clayton Lambert; 'Alec H. Peterson'
Cc: 'Jim Macknik'; vwp at arin.net
Subject: RE: ARIN Justified...
The challenge of course is that when they were allocated the space,
current allocation policies were not in place, nor was a policy
saying that the rules could be changed later, hence there is serious
legal question over whether or not the rules can be changed after the
At 6:49 PM -0800 1/9/01, Clayton Lambert wrote:
>As a person involved with a company that never had a /8 given to it...I say
>it isn't that difficult...They back it up, or they lose it...Point.
>Compliance Services Director,
>From: Alec H. Peterson [mailto:ahp at hilander.com]
>Sent: Tuesday, January 09, 2001 6:46 PM
>To: Clayton Lambert
>Cc: 'Jim Macknik'; vwp at arin.net
>Subject: Re: ARIN Justified...
>Clayton Lambert wrote:
>> I think that companies with /8's and multiple unjustified /16's should
>> to provide supporting documentation to keep them.
>This is a tough issue that we have often come back to. Unfortunately, we
>have yet to come up with a good answer...
>Alec H. Peterson - ahp at hilander.com
>CenterGate Research Group - http://www.centergate.com
>"Technology so advanced, even _we_ don't understand it!"
Justin W. Newton
Senior Director, Networking and Telecommunications
More information about the Vwp