ERX: Early Registration Transfers mostly happened a long time ago or shortly after LACNIC and AFRINIC were created. See the following;
https://www.arin.net/vault/participate/meetings/reports/ARIN_X/PDF/erx.pdf On Sat, Aug 6, 2022 at 17:24 Ted Mittelstaedt <[email protected]> wrote: > Once more, nobody cares about those because they are _in use_. > > Interesting that there's a handful of legacy space in other RIRs. I > hadn't thought about transfers. However I don't believe transfers > can happen unless they sign an LSRA so they are "in the system" at that > point. > > Ted > > On 8/6/2022 2:19 PM, Mike Burns wrote: > > Just a point of clarification. > > ARIN is not the only RIR with legacy blocks. > > Check ARIN ERX Transfers. > > Every RIR has them, and has similar policies regarding them. > > There are some significant differences related to transfers of legacy > space. > > > > Regards, > > Mike > > > > > > > > > > ------- Original Message ------- > > *From :* Ted Mittelstaedt[mailto:[email protected]] > > *Sent :* 8/6/2022 4:10:28 PM > > *To :* [email protected]; [email protected] > > *Cc :* [email protected] > > *Subject :* RE: Re: [arin-ppml] ARIN actions regarding address blocks > > with no valid POCs (was: Re: Deceased Companies?) > > > > Nobody not even me is suggesting that. What I am saying is that the > > ARIN community has that power. > > > > Ted > > > > On 8/6/2022 11:25 AM, Lee Dilkie wrote: > > > The legacy blocks were created and in existence before ARIN took > > > responsibility of them and while ARIN could simply take them all back, > > > with no regard for history, it smacks of "colonialism" to me. You > know, > > > where the enlightened civilized folks take property from the savages > > > because they can put it to better use. Those savages aren't even > paying > > > tax (arin fees) so really they should have no rights at all. > > > > > > See? That's how history repeats itself. > > > > > > -lee > > > > > > On 2022-08-06 11:45, Ted Mittelstaedt wrote: > > >> That is correct which is why John has repeatedly stated that action > on > > >> these needs to originate with the community. Essentially the RIR > > >> system's legal support and basis for power is the same as the United > > >> Nations various subcommittees such as WIPO - general consensus among > > >> members. > > >> > > >> ARIN is the only RIR that has legacy blocks so this is a unique issue > > >> with just the ARIN RIR. Most of the rest of ARIN such as NRPM is > used > > >> as a pattern by the other RIRs. > > >> > > >> It is likely that what the community does with regards to the legacy > > >> blocks will have an effect on the "deceased company" issue but the > > >> simple reality with registered blocks, which John has tried to get > > >> people to understand, is that as long as an entity is paying the > > >> renewal fees, while it might be apparent that the block is "on > > >> autopilot" and is not in use/being sat on/etc. and that is incredibly > > >> irritating, the existence of ongoing payments and ongoing claims that > > >> the block is "in use" by the payor and the existence of the original > > >> contract between the entity and the RIR, all of that establishes a > > >> legal right to continue to have the registration, by that entity. > > >> > > >> If ARIN acts without consensus among the community, then it > > >> jeopardizes the entire RIR system. We don't want the UN coming in > and > > >> taking it all over and the UN doesn't want to do that as long as the > > >> RIR system appears to be functioning on consensus. > > >> > > >> The gray line is what constitutes legitimate operations of the RIR > and > > >> where is the line between that and operations that cannot happen > > >> without consensus to modify the NRPM. I have argued in the past that > > >> ARIN has enough authority by the NRPM to houseclean - John's > statement > > >> a few days ago contradicts that - which means as John said if we want > > >> ARIN to take a broom to the legacy blocks, we have to give them more > > >> authority to do so by modifying the NRPM. > > >> > > >> The actual truth is that if the community was united it could revoke > > >> all legacy blocks tomorrow despite whatever legalities people out > > >> there would argue. Ultimately it all comes down to what the major > ISP > > >> networks would accept, just because a RIR says a block is assigned to > > >> someone else doesn't mean all the major ISPs are required to adhere > to > > >> that. In practice the major ISPs do because they prefer this over > the > > >> chaos that would result otherwise, but ultimately all a legacy block > > >> is, is a checkoff in a database in ARIN. Nobody HAS to actually > > >> follow it. > > >> > > >> We could vote in power to ARIN to revoke and they could do it. It > > >> would be a hellofa mess and absolutely the wrong thing to do - but > the > > >> community absolutely does have the power to do it. > > >> > > >> Beyond that, absence of a proposal, it's all talk and no action. So I > > >> guess if I want to see anything done I have to get cracking on a > > >> proposal. > > >> > > >> Ted > > >> > > >> On 8/4/2022 7:42 PM, Paul E McNary wrote: > > >>> If I understood what John clarified for me earlier in this thread > ... > > >>> Many of the Legacy blocks will not be under NPRM and ARIN has to > > >>> tread very carefully on trying to claw these addresses back. > > >>> Many blocks that might be abandoned fall into legacy, especially > > >>> /24's, assigned pre-ARIN. > > >>> As always, many times I understand incorrectly. > > >>> > > >>> ----- Original Message ----- > > >>> From: "Ted Mittelstaedt" <[email protected]> > > >>> To: "John Curran" <[email protected]> > > >>> Cc: "arin-ppml" <[email protected]> > > >>> Sent: Thursday, August 4, 2022 9:30:36 PM > > >>> Subject: Re: [arin-ppml] ARIN actions regarding address blocks with > > >>> no valid POCs (was: Re: Deceased Companies?) > > >>> > > >>>> Ted - > > >>>> > > >>>> To my knowledge, the Number Resource Policy Manual (NRPM, i.e. > > >>>> https://www.arin.net/participate/policy/nrpm/ > > <https://www.arin.net/participate/policy/nrpm/> > > >>>> < https://www.arin.net/participate/policy/nrpm/> > > <https://www.arin.net/participate/policy/nrpm/>> ) does not presently > > >>>> provide for ARIN performing reclamation of address blocks assigned > > >>>> to an > > >>>> organization that has no valid POCs – it provides that such > > >>>> organizations "will be unable to access further functionalities > within > > >>>> ARIN Online” and cannot be receiving organization for a > > reallocation or > > >>>> detailed reassignment. (NRPM 3.6.5 and NRPM 3.7 respectively) > > >>>> > > >>> > > >>> Technically an org like LT is obtaining a detailed reassignment from > > >>> whatever ISP they are using (most likely, it's a /29) Of course, > they > > >>> probably don't even realize or remember that they have a prior > > >>> allocation which according to the NRPM needs valid POCs and also > needs > > >>> to meet utilization requirements before they were supposed to get > > >>> their /29 > > >>> > > >>> But, like I said, they aren't bad people, just likely ignorant of > what > > >>> they have. I suspect ARIN could take care of this by directly > > >>> contacting them based on 3.6.5 and 3.7. I also suspect that is the > > case > > >>> for a lot of the abandoned stuff. I do agree it would take a LOT of > > >>> manpower and lacking clear direction from the community to do it is > > >>> probably a big sticking point for ARIN which is why you are hinting > a > > >>> policy change is needed. > > >>> > > >>>> If you’d like ARIN to take particular action on address blocks > with no > > >>>> valid POCs, please propose policy specifying the actions for > community > > >>>> consideration and potential adoption. > > >>> As you know, the main reason the POC validation was put into NRPM > > was to > > >>> allow ARIN to require POC validity, so that it would discourage > > spammers > > >>> and other criminals from trying to hide themselves behind fake > names if > > >>> they registered blocks, and it would make it possible to alert block > > >>> holders who had bad citizens acting from IPs in their blocks. > > >>> > > >>> It was the "license plate" argument, that is, just like a car they > are > > >>> using a public resource, so the public has a right to know who they > > are, > > >>> which is why we slap license plates on cars. Even though that > really > > >>> pisses off some people. > > >>> > > >>> But a secondary reason was to try to get a handle (no pun intended) > on > > >>> the extent of the "abandoned resources" problem. Along with > validation > > >>> came a requirement for ARIN to report. Well, it's certainly been > long > > >>> enough to get some valid data back - could you, John, say now, > based on > > >>> that data, what percentage of IPv4 number resources in ARIN are like > > >>> this particular one - they have only invalid POCs and no valid ones? > > >>> > > >>> While those resources might not be available for use (as their orgs > > >>> might be using them internally and just not kept up with the > reporting > > >>> requirements) if you could give us a percentage, if it's high enough > > >>> it might stimulate the community to support additional requirements > for > > >>> having ARIN get a bit more activist on getting these resources back. > > >>> > > >>> I sort of liken this to the "abandoned car" issue in a major city. > If > > >>> the numbers of abandoned vehicles in a city are below .0001% then > the > > >>> population does nothing, but if it increases to .01% or .1% the > > >>> population goes ballistic and starts demanding the city start > towing, > > >>> because the public wants it's street parking space back. > > >>> > > >>> So the question is, what are we leaving on the table? I think that > was > > >>> the thrust behind the very first query on this thread. > > >>> > > >>> Frankly I DO think we should seriously consider revoking > registrations > > >>> of number blocks that lack valid POCs. In this day and age, asking > a > > >>> number block holder to supply a valid POC is the absolute LEAST > > that the > > >>> community can ask. It's not enough to have just a valid street > > address. > > >>> It is after all, year 2022. Having an email address is NOT a > > barrier > > >>> to anyone. If they are a small org they can just duplicate most of > the > > >>> info in the main number block into a POC and add a phone number and > > >>> email address. It's not a hardship. If they are large then a > street > > >>> address of some main corporate HQ is useless if anyone needs to > contact > > >>> an individual about something going on from their IP addresses. > > >>> > > >>> Ted > > >>> > > >>>> You can find more information on > > >>>> submission of policy proposals here - > > >>>> https://www.arin.net/participate/policy/pdp/appendix_b/ > > <https://www.arin.net/participate/policy/pdp/appendix_b/> > > >>>> < https://www.arin.net/participate/policy/pdp/appendix_b/> > > <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 > > <https://lists.arin.net/mailman/listinfo/arin-ppml> > > >>> Please contact [email protected] if you experience any issues. > > >> _______________________________________________ > > >> 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 > > <https://lists.arin.net/mailman/listinfo/arin-ppml> > > >> Please contact [email protected] if you experience any issues. > > > > > _______________________________________________ > > 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 > > <https://lists.arin.net/mailman/listinfo/arin-ppml> > > Please contact [email protected] if you experience any issues. > > > _______________________________________________ > 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. > -- =============================================== David Farmer Email:[email protected] Networking & Telecommunication Services Office of Information Technology University of Minnesota 2218 University Ave SE Phone: 612-626-0815 Minneapolis, MN 55414-3029 Cell: 612-812-9952 ===============================================
_______________________________________________ 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.
