On 6/25/13 1:50 PM, Milton L Mueller wrote: > Of course it is. But, as John Curran says, that fact is not dispositive of > anything, as any organization can make policy proposals. The debate should > take place on substantive grounds.
You're in the right ball park, that LEO jurisdictions are territorially limited, which leads to outcomes which replicate their jurisdictional scope. The point I was offering, which you're free to continue to regard as non-substantive, is that the interests of the Department of Defense, articulated through its ARPA/DARPA/ARPA/DARPA agency, as well as the interests of the National Science Foundation, and delegated as rule making capacity to ARIN, are unconstrained by the jurisdictional limitations on law enforcement agencies, federal or inferior. The domestic law enforcement claims of Agency X do not, of necessity, encompass the interests entrusted to ARIN. <random_archic_hat = "ON"> A request for assistance by the FBI to a DARPA contractor operating, inter alia, a SCIF and sundry other HTRD/SPAWARS/SAC junk was just that, a request, and until confirmed by an ASD or his designate, not actionable. </r_a_h> Eric _______________________________________________ PPML You are receiving this message because you are subscribed to the ARIN Public Policy Mailing List ([email protected]). Unsubscribe or manage your mailing list subscription at: http://lists.arin.net/mailman/listinfo/arin-ppml Please contact [email protected] if you experience any issues.
