North American Network Operators Group
Date Prev | Date Next | Date Index | Thread Index | Author Index | Historical

Re: [Fwd: RE: Kremen VS Arin Antitrust Lawsuit - Anyone have feedback?]

  • From: Owen DeLong
  • Date: Mon Sep 11 14:20:12 2006 
IP addresses appear to be property - - read http://news.findlaw.com/
hdocs/docs/cyberlaw/kremencohen72503opn.pdf.  Given that domain names
are property, IP addresses should be property, especially in
California where are constitution states "All things of value are
property"


I'm not sure how you can say that 32 bit integers have monetary
value.  There are more than 4 billiion of them and anyone can
use any number they choose.  What is valuable is the unique
registration service which provides for a set of cooperating
entities to share a single 32 bit number space without collision.
Also, what about ARINS hardcore attitude making it near impossible
to aquire ip space, even when you justify it's use? I have had
nightmares myself as well as MANY of my collegues share similar experiences.
I am having an issue right now with a UNIVERSITY in Mexico tryin to get
ip's from the mexican counterpart. Why is it that they involve lawyers,
ask you all your customers names and etc... This is more information than
I think they should be requiring. Any company that wishes to engage in
business as an ISP or provider in some capacity should be granted the
right to their own ip space. We cannot trust using ips swipped to us by
upstreams and the like. Its just not safe to do that and you lose control.

I have a great deal of difficulty identifying with this. The information ARIN
requests is, in my experience, reasonable and necessary for them to
accurately verify that your request is in compliance with allocation
policies. If you don't provide customer names, you can claim any number
of customers you want and fabricate as large an artificial network as
you like with no checks or balances.

Having said that, in my experience, a properly filled out template in
compliance with the policies has little or no difficulty getting addresses
issued by ARIN. If you don't like the policies, then, there is an open
process to change them. Having participated in that process for
a number of years and having worked actively to make it possible
to get address space for smaller entities (2002-3, Assignments
of /22, for example) and portable IPv6 assignments for end-users
(Policy 2005-1), I know it is possible to change ARIN policy. However,
like any form of governance, this is a slow process and requires the
building of consensus.
Actually, is there anyone else who shares these nightmares with me?
I brought up the lawsuit with Kremen and ARIN to see if this is a common
issue. What are your views, and can someone share nightmare stories?

There may be people who share your nightmares, but, I suspect it
would be less of a nightmare if you worked with the ARIN staff
instead of railing against them.

Don't get me wrong, I think there has to be SOME due dilligence,
however their methodology is a bit hitlerish.


This is completely opposite of my experience.  There was a time
when I might have agreed with you, but, ARIN has changed a lot
and is a much friendlier organization today than even 5 years ago.
If you have had similar problems, contact me off list or on, if you wish.
I'd love to talk to you. AIM is preferred.

I've had the opposite experience across a number of
ARIN allocations and assignments for organizations of various
sizes.

Owen

Attachment: PGP.sig
Description: This is a digitally signed message part