On Jun 3, 2015, at 5:48 PM, Matthew Kaufman <[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>> wrote: ... You could certainly argue (and I might) that the records of legacy assignments were in fact entrusted to ARIN to keep, and keep updated *whether or not the community drafted policy that said such updates were disallowed*
Noting just one of the significant problems with that argument being that at the time of ARIN’s formation, the actual applicable registry policy was RFC 2050 (having been finished just a year earlier with folks like David Conrad and Jon Postel as authors) - it states that those obtaining addresses via transfer must "meet the same criteria as if they were requesting an IP address directly from the Internet Registry." I.E., If we were maintain the exact status quo that such parties had prior to ARIN’s formation, recognized ARIN is entrusted to maintain that, then folks probably would not like the result - today’s transfer policy is more lenient than the transfer policy at that point in time. (Thank an ARIN Advisory Council member when you next see them for all of their efforts getting useful transfer policy in the Number Resource Policy Manual! :-) 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.
