On Mon, Jul 25, 2022 at 8:03 PM John Curran <[email protected]> wrote: > > On 25 Jul 2022, at 10:18 PM, William Herrin <[email protected]> wrote: > > https://lists.arin.net/pipermail/arin-ppml/2012-June/058754.html > > Yes, I remain well aware of it, but alas it was the NSF that directed the > transfer of the tasks and > database to ARIN – there is nothing present in their direction to suggest > your postulated limitation,
In point of fact John, the NSF direction is completely mute on the subject, neither authorizing ARIN to alter the legacy grants nor refusing ARIN that authority. As I recall, the NSF direction is quite terse in general. > and the NSF press release is remarkably clear that the community will be able > to set policy for the > management of the registry database. A press release is not a legally controlling document. It's one in a series of documents, each building on the last, which illuminates the intention of the legally controlling document that was mute on the matter. In other words, it has to be viewed in the _context_ of the rest of the documents and presentations that led up to it. Like the preceding FNCAC presentation and similar presentations by then-proponents of establishing ARIN which specified ARIN would not materially alter the legacy registrations without the registrants' permission regardless of changes in new ARIN policy. We've gotten way into the weeds here so I'll bring it back to this: it's dubious whether or not ARIN has the authority to make and enforce a change to the policies that would have a materially adverse impact on the legacy registrations. You say yes. I say no. Until a judge says yes or no we're both guessing. What *is* certain is that ARIN has not attempted to do so in the quarter century it has existed. Not even once. There have been proposals but none have proceeded to adoption or implementation. Many changes adversely impacting RSA registrations. None adversely impacting legacy registrations. And because I can't resist one last dig - I observe again that ARIN has studiously avoided putting any judge in the position to decide the question. In each case, the matter was either decided by finding that the litigant was not the legacy registrant or ARIN has found a way to settle the matter, twisting policy as needed to do so. Nortel/Microsoft was an example of the latter in which Microsoft negotiated a contract for which then-extant policy made the address transfer ineligible. You speak confidently here on the list but for anyone who watches closely, ARIN's behavior in court tells the story. Regards, Bill Herrin Regards, Bill Herrin -- For hire. https://bill.herrin.us/resume/ _______________________________________________ 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: https://lists.arin.net/mailman/listinfo/arin-ppml Please contact [email protected] if you experience any issues.
