On 5 Aug 2022, at 2:39 AM, Ronald F. Guilmette <[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>> wrote:
Although I am greatly appreciative of Ted's comments, which appear to be supportive of the primary point that I most recently attempted to make here, I am obliged to point out that the example of the 199.248.255.0/24 block, and ARIN's seeming reluctance to reclaim it, *does not* actually support the point that I have attempted to make here most recently. for one very glaringly obvious reason: RegDate: 1994-10-11 199.248.255.0/24 is unambiguously a legacy block. Thus, ARIN may or may not have in hand either a signed RSA or a signed LRSA that is relevant and applicable to this block. For the sake of argument, let's assume that it doesn't. Other people may reasonably disagree with me, but I personally am at least somewhat sympathetic to the various legal assertions and bold claims that have been made by various IPv4 legacy registrants, over time. I am also at least somewhat sympathetic to ARIN's understandable reluctance, if any, to sally forth and do battle in the courts over such legacy-related claims. Alas, there’s very little evidence that legacy resource holders (being parties that lack any written agreement with ARIN) have any magical ability or right that would preclude ARIN operating its registry exactly as directed by community policy (including entries held by legacy resource holders), but I recognize there are some who may feel otherwise. ARIN actually have zero reluctance when it comes to defending the community’s right to establish apply policies applicable to the entire registry, and we do quite vigorously defend the same in court without hesitation. (Any reticence you see regarding the establishment of new policy requirements applicable to legacy resource holders is simply driven out of the desire to be respectful to all parties with resources in the registry and desire that any such policy changes be based out of a clearly articulated policy need of this community. We have done many such changes in the past that are applicable to the entire registry including legacy resource holders – this includes addition of the abuse contact, number resource resource review section, POC validation, etc.) ... In fairness, I must apologize to John Curran, to the entire ARIN staff, and to everyone here if my questions relating to this topic of dead companies may at times have seemed somewhat accusatory in tone. Upon reflection, I must now say that any apparent inaction, on the part of ARIN staff, with respect to such deceased entities, although somewhat frustrating to me personally, is likely entirely understandable. It would be entirely unfair to lay any blame for what would appear to be a lack of action relating to such cases at the feet of the ARIN staff. I mean after all, they are but the servants of the ARIN community and the ARIN membership, and they cannot fairly be blamed if the community and the membership have given them absolutely zero in the way of clear guidance on what, if anything, they should do about dead resource-holding organizations. Rather, if there is any blame to be laid for inaction when it comes to dead resource-holding organizations, then I think that it can only fairly be assigned to the ARIN community and the ARIN membership. The community and the membership should have addressed this issue long ago, and having failed to do so, the community and the membership should do so now. Better late than never. It is altogether clear to me what must, at the very least be done. At the very least, the community and/or the membership should give clear guidance, immediately, to John Curran and the ARIN staff regarding what they should do when they become aware, VIA ANY MEANS OR CHANNEL, of the dissolution of any resource-holding entity that has ever signed an RSA agreement with ARIN. ... So, it is clear, to me at least, what must, at a minimum, be done. The question remains of what process should be used to achieve it. Should this be a "consultation" or should it instead be a formal policy proposal? I would suggest a formal policy proposal; you can find additional information on submitting such here – https://www.arin.net/participate/policy/pdp/appendix_b/ Thanks! /John John Curran President and CEO American Registry for Internet Numbers
_______________________________________________ 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.
