2014-9 (about resolving the conflict between NRPM 8.2 and the RSA) is the first 
step towards this goal.

David R Huberman
Microsoft Corporation
Senior IT/OPS Program Manager (GFS)
________________________________
From: [email protected] <[email protected]> on behalf of CJ 
Aronson <[email protected]>
Sent: Monday, April 7, 2014 7:37:06 AM
To: Milton L Mueller
Cc: John Curran; [email protected]; [email protected]
Subject: Re: [arin-ppml] ARIN-PPML Digest, Vol 106, Issue 8 (Sandra Brown)

Milton if someone wants "ARIN to ease it's needs assessment requirements for 
transfers" then there has to be a policy proposal submitted that gains 
community support.  ARIN can't just change this without the process being 
followed.  In the past the policies to ease needs assessment have not gained 
community support but things change so who knows.

----Cathy


On Mon, Apr 7, 2014 at 8:17 AM, Milton L Mueller 
<[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>> wrote:


> -----Original Message-----
>
> To the extent that the community feels that registry policy should be
> applicable in general to the management of address blocks in the region,
> then the rights afforded to address holders must definitely be a subset of
> what most folks would consider "property rights."  In particular, to the 
> extent

I think the real issue is whether ARIN has any rights claims over number block 
holders it does not have a contract with. RIPE seems to have foregone any such 
claims. The sky has not fallen in Europe.

> absent any change in
> direction, ARIN must hold to the position set at its establishment and its in
> foundational documents that all address space in the registry is subject to
> community-develop number resource policy.

Not sure I buy the assertion that these principles were in the foundational 
documents; why did you need to add this language later? The 'no property 
rights' language came very late in the day.

> > Perhaps at some point some party with more at stake, will force the
> > property right issue in court,
>
> That actually could be quite beneficial, as would help in providing further
> certainty regarding the ability of ARIN to maintain the registry per the 
> wishes
> and policies developed by the community.  Parties without any agreement

I think it would be easier for everyone if ARIN would just ease its 
needs-assessment requirements for transfers. The whole threat of litigation 
could be dissipated in a week if this happened.

_______________________________________________
PPML
You are receiving this message because you are subscribed to
the ARIN Public Policy Mailing List 
([email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>).
Unsubscribe or manage your mailing list subscription at:
http://lists.arin.net/mailman/listinfo/arin-ppml
Please contact [email protected]<mailto:[email protected]> if you experience any issues.

_______________________________________________
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.

Reply via email to