ng that occurs at this point is the
> customer negotiates with the supplier for an extension in service which they pay
> for.
And they claim they did but that NAC did not negotiate in good faith.
Also that as NAC
has indicated a desire to purchase them may have reason not to
nego
On Tue, 29 Jun 2004 12:27:43 -0400, Hannigan, Martin
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Why would the other side(new provider) violate ARIN policy and route the
> space?
They would not be legaly obligated to do so by the current TRO. However
note this is supposedly a temporay use of IP space. Some no
life could
well be hellish. If the requirements for the lack of IP portability are indeed
purely technical and not some effort to hold onto customers then service
providers have a duty to make almost any reasonable effort to make the
transition as painless as poss
