[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
And so it ends...
On Feb 3, 2011, at 8:51 AM, Benson Schliesser wrote:
> On Feb 3, 2011, at 10:39 AM, John Curran wrote:
>> On Feb 3, 2011, at 11:22 AM, Benson Schliesser wrote:
>>> That's what the RIR might say. But without legal authority (e.g. under contract, as a regulator, or through statutory authority) it is difficult or impossible to enforce.
>> Transfers are permitted in the ARIN region per the community developed policies.
> Understood. My point is: legacy holders, unless they've signed the LRSA or equivalent, aren't required to submit to the ARIN process.
That remains to be seen. If they give up their space, it is unclear that they have any right to transfer it to another
organization rather than return it to the successor registry. There is no precedent established showing that
this is allowed.
>>> We can talk about how people "should" return addresses, or "should" justify transfers, etc, but we would only be begging. Transfers will take place outside the RIR scope, because RIR transfer/market policy doesn't accommodate reality.
>> Such transfers should be reported when noticed, so the resources can be reclaimed and reissued.
> Is any RIR authorized, in a legal sense, to "reclaim" legacy address blocks that RIR didn't "issue"? Without that legal authority, is any RIR prepared to accommodate the legal damages stemming from "reclamation"? (Does the RIR membership support such action, in the first place?)
That remains to be seen. IANA has declared them the successor registries for the legacy blocks and there is widespread belief that addresses were issued for use and expected to be returned when that use was no longer valid.
The other thing to consider is that the RIR doesn't really need to "reclaim" the block, per se. They can simply stop providing uniqueness to the organizations that don't have a contract with them and issue those numbers to some other organization that has a contract. The other organization would know that their uniqueness is limited to those cooperating in the registry system.
Does an organization that has no contract with an RIR have a right to expect that RIR to continue to provide them a unique registration?