Home page logo
/

nanog logo nanog mailing list archives

Re: IPv4 address exchange
From: Benson Schliesser <bensons () queuefull net>
Date: Mon, 18 Apr 2011 19:12:17 -0500


On Apr 18, 2011, at 6:33 PM, David Conrad wrote:

As far as I can tell, the participants in ARIN's processes are more interested in trying to be a regulator than in 
being a registry. Given ARIN is not a government body and it does not have full buy-in from those who they would try 
to regulate, I suspect this will directly result in a proliferation of folks like tradeipv4.com, depository.net, etc. 
Unfortunately, I figure this will have negative repercussions for network operations (unless someone steps in and 
provides a definitive "address titles registry").

I agree completely with this concern.  Against good advice of friends (who said I would be wasting my time), I tried to 
do something about it:  I introduced several policy proposals to ARIN that deal with the question of authority and 
ownership.

At John Curran's advice, the ARIN Advisory Council abandoned my proposals.  Two of them are now in "petition" for 
further discussion, including ARIN-prop-134 which outlines how to identify a "legitimate address holder" and 
ARIN-prop-136 which allows a Legacy holder to "opt-out" of ARIN's services.  The idea is to make it possible for legacy 
holders (who don't have a contract with ARIN) to disarm ARIN's whois weapon.

If anybody on NANOG supports these concepts, please express your support to PPML so that the proposals can move forward.

Please see these links for more info:

http://lists.arin.net/pipermail/arin-ppml/2011-April/020604.html

http://lists.arin.net/pipermail/arin-ppml/2011-April/020605.html

Cheers,
-Benson


  By Date           By Thread  

Current thread:
[ Nmap | Sec Tools | Mailing Lists | Site News | About/Contact | Advertising | Privacy ]