[125155] in North American Network Operators' Group
Re: Behold - the Address-Yenta!
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (David Conrad)
Fri Apr 9 12:21:45 2010
From: David Conrad <drc@virtualized.org>
In-Reply-To: <B33B196F-5B6E-4DEA-BEE3-12A8DEE76FCE@arin.net>
Date: Fri, 9 Apr 2010 06:20:31 -1000
To: John Curran <jcurran@arin.net>
Cc: NANOG list <nanog@nanog.org>
Errors-To: nanog-bounces+nanog.discuss=bloom-picayune.mit.edu@nanog.org
John,
On Apr 9, 2010, at 1:43 AM, John Curran wrote:
> ARIN's position follows RFC 2008
This seems to be contradicted by ARIN's (perfectly reasonable) policies =
regarding the assignment of provider independent address space to end =
users.
As to whether addresses are assets, I suspect we'll have to wait until =
the courts rule. I'm sure folks at Networld+InterOp, Apple, HP, etc. =
will be quite surprised if the courts rule according to ARIN's views.
> The question discussed is the practice of performing resource review =
as a=20
> result of fraudulent applications. =20
Actually, no. The question was whether the practice of creating a =
company to hold IP addresses then selling that company to another =
organization was considered by ARIN to be fraudulent. In the particular =
(historical) cases I'm aware of, the address space in question was =
legacy /24s and the transfers were done (as I understand it) according =
to ARIN policies of the time.
Speaking personally (of course), I'll admit a certain lack of comfort =
with the idea of ARIN (or any RIR) acting as lawmaker, police, judge, =
jury, and (assuming RPKI gets deployed) executioner.
Regards,
-drc
=20
