|
North American Network Operators Group Date Prev | Date Next | Date Index | Thread Index | Author Index | Historical RE: ARIN Comment
> On Jul 1, 2004, at 4:15 PM, William Allen Simpson wrote: > > I was also concerned, until I read the actual pleadings. > > > > Although nobody's ever allowed us (AS19933) more than 1 month to > > renumber, and we've always had to pay both providers during the time, > > so we've always kept it as short as possible anyway.... > But now you can get PI space and take well over a year to renumber into > it without fear of ARIN asking for it back. This is an example of a gross generalization, assuming that what held true in one case will be true in every case. First of all, we hav eno idea whether ARIN will ask for it back or not. This case had nothing to do with ARIN. This case was a dispute between a service provider and their customer and had nothing at all to do with the enforcement of ARIN policies. > NAC may not have posted the whole proceeding at first, but Alex was > very clear he wanted commentary only on the allocation policies. Some > of us (me included) took it a bit farther. Now it is clear from ARIN - > who is supposedly in charge of this stuff in "America" - that nothing > is wrong with taking months after your contract expires to number out > of PA space, and over a year to renumber into PI space once it is > granted. So I guess commentary is no longer needed (except maybe at > ARIN meetings?). Huh? ARIN offered no opinion that I saw on whether the renumbering was acceptable or not. ARIN is not a party to this dispute and only looked into it because of the fear that this might be a case where a judge tried to convert NP space into portable space. Since it seems rather clear that this is *not* what is happening in this case, ARIN decided nothing needed to be done. Look, Alex only wanted commentary on the allocation policies, but ARIN commented on the facts of this specific case. Now you're acting as if ARIN commented only on the allocation policies. This is just not the case. ARIN responded to the precise facts of this specific issue and did not state any general principle. They don't have to -- the general principles are in their policies. > The first is somewhat customary but by no means universally practiced. > Now it seems to be officially sanctioned. I was under the obviously > incorrect impression the latter was against ARIN policy. Again, ARIN commented only on this specific case and concluded that the TRO did not relate to a violation of ARIN policy. In fact, the TRO has nothing to do with the fact that the customer has PI space and hasn't renumbered into it. It has to do with the use of the NP space, and to my knowledge, the way NP space is being used in the case is not at all out of the ordinary. > Glad we have official clarification. We have official clarification only about how ARIN feels about how the NP space is being used in this particular case. DS
|