I understand your concern and even share it to a point but we need to deal with
real life, and real life is that it is pretty unlikely to get all of the
original /8 and other large block legacy holders to sign contracts with ARIN
(not to mention the small legacy block holders).
Do you really think that ALL of the AT&Ts & Verizons and Fords - not to mention
the DOD - and all of the other fortune 1000 companies that hold large legacy
blocks are going to sign agreements.
No one can force them to and no one should try and force them. This goes for
the thousands of organizations that got Class C blocks as well. Real life is
that they all exist and ARIN has no direct legal authority over them.
It is just time to stop playing like these legacy holders don't exist and bring
them into the community without requiring them to do anything and I think the
RIP 605 does just that. My two cents.
Steven L Ryerse
President
100 Ashford Center North, Suite 110, Atlanta, GA 30338
770.656.1460 - Cell
770.399.9099 - Office
770.392-0076 - Fax
℠ Eclipse Networks, Inc.
Conquering Complex Networks℠
-----Original Message-----
From: Morizot Timothy S [mailto:[email protected]]
Sent: Thursday, February 13, 2014 5:24 PM
To: Steven Ryerse; 'Owen DeLong'; David Conrad
Cc: John Curran; [email protected]
Subject: RE: [arin-ppml] FYI -- RIPE-605 Services to
LegacyInternetResourceHolders
Steven L Ryerse wrote:
>I think that the new RIPE policy is acknowledging this reality and I
>think ARIN adopting the same identical policy makes sense because it
>would allow the coming together of Legacy holders and ARIN allocations holders
>which I think is in everyone's interest.
>
>Note that I would expect ARIN to be able to request and receive proof
>of a completed transaction before they update their database with the new
>information.
Interesting. So you believe it's in the interest of those of us who have signed
RSAs and LRSAs to subsidize (through our annual fees) those who want free
registry services even though they refuse to adhere to the number resource
policy in our region. That policy, in part, requires that the recipient of a
legacy resource transfer, who by definition cannot be a legacy allocation
recipient, sign an RSA and contribute toward the cost of providing those
registry services.
That's an interesting perspective, but I'm not sure I agree. ARIN can't really
control use and advertisement of resources, but if someone who isn't a pre-ARIN
legacy recipient expects to receive registry services, I'm okay with requiring
them to sign an RSA and pay for those services.
Scott
_______________________________________________
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.
