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

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

  • From: Fred Baker
  • Date: Tue Sep 12 19:25:56 2006
  • Authentication-results: sj-dkim-8.cisco.com; [email protected]; dkim=pass (sig from cisco.com verified; );
  • Dkim-signature: a=rsa-sha1; q=dns; l=558; t=1158103329; x=1158967329;c=relaxed/relaxed; s=sjdkim8002; h=Content-Type:From:Subject:Content-Transfer-Encoding:MIME-Version;d=cisco.com; [email protected]; z=From:Fred=20Baker=20<[email protected]>|Subject:Re=3A=20[Fwd=3A=20Kremen=20VS=20Arin=20Antitrust=20Lawsuit=20-=20Anyone=20have=20feedback?];X=v=3Dcisco.com=3B=20h=3DILVCL8n7Lw+LxRfs+6xF1VOhZQE=3D; b=vgMf2iUZkJgaJzmaXjnfWxU9M3gYwHNtASPrfrbdav5z825GEHz+ViyU6tKH2UQi/CC/DOItD4Yp+qmRYsC3u3xJoy7HroanMrj85tSA13DQrvxmv8EqMa3aUWJ8eV8+;
On Sep 12, 2006, at 2:45 AM, Daniel Golding wrote:
What would establish IP addresses as some sort of ARIN-owned and licensed community property? Well, winning a court case like this, or congress passing a law.
Korea also has passed a law that any addresses assign to KRNIC become the property of KRNIC. But even passing a law doesn't make it so.

IP Addresses have always been treated as a resource of the network since its inception. The fact that lawmakers don't understand or care to understand doesn't change the facts of the case.