On Apr 7, 2014, at 10:17 AM, Milton L Mueller <[email protected]> wrote: >> 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. ...
ARIN has does have the right to manage the all of the address blocks in the registry in accordance with the community-developed policy (and we have doing so since inception); ergo the responsibility lies with those who assert otherwise to build and argue a meaningful case. >> 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; ... For example: <https://www.nsf.gov/news/news_summ.jsp?cntn_id=102819> - "Creation of ARIN will give the users of IP numbers (mostly Internet service providers, corporations and other large institutions) a voice in the policies by which they are _managed and allocated_ [emphasis added] within the North American region." ARIN's incorporation is another example, noting a purpose to "manage and help conserve scarce Internet protocol resources" As another example, RFC 2050 was most certainly definitive at the time and is quite explicit on the matter - "The transfer of IP addresses from one party to another must be approved by the regional registries. The party trying to obtain the IP address must meet the same criteria as if they were requesting an IP address directly from the IR." I believe that the community is free to change the applicable number resource policy in this area, but it would be rather difficult to argue that the application of community-developed policy (to transfers of already issued resources in the region) has not been position that has been in existence since the establishment of ARIN. > 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. It is certainly possible for the community to end up with policies which no longer require needs-assessment with respect to transfers; ARIN would follow such policies with respect to the management of all resources in the registry, i.e. while such a change may address timely concerns held by some, that would not result in any change to the position that the ARIN community can establish policies applicable to the management of all number resources in the registry. FYI, /John John Curran President and CEO ARIN _______________________________________________ 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.
