Whatever happened to the entire class E block? I know it's reserved for future use, but sounds like that future is now given that we've exhausted all existing allocations.

Sent from my Verizon, Samsung Galaxy smartphone

-------- Original message --------
From: William Herrin <bill@herrin.us>
Date: 7/22/19 12:16 PM (GMT-06:00)
To: John Curran <jcurran@arin.net>
Cc: North American Network Operators' Group <nanog@nanog.org>
Subject: Re: 44/8

On Mon, Jul 22, 2019 at 6:02 AM John Curran <jcurran@arin.net> wrote:
> On 21 Jul 2019, at 7:32 AM, William Herrin <bill@herrin.us> wrote:
> > Having read their explanation, I think the folks involved had good
> > reasons and the best intentions but this stinks like fraud to me. Worse,
> > it looks like ARIN was complicit in the fraud -- encouraging and then
> > supporting the folks involved as they established a fiefdom of their own
> >rather than integrating with the organizations that existed.
>
> As you are aware, there are individuals and businesses who operate as
>a “Doing Business As/DBA" or on behalf on an unincorporated organization
>at the time of issuance; it is a more common occurrence than one might imagine,
>and we have to deal with the early registrations appropriately based on the
>particular circumstance.   ARIN promptly put processes in place so that such
>registrations, having been made on behalf of a particular purpose or organization,
>do not get misappropriated to become rights solely of the point of contact held for
>personal gain – indeed, there are cases where organizations are created with
>similar names for the purposes of hijacking number resources, but such cases
>don’t generally involve principles who were involved in the administration of the
>resources since issuance nor do they involve formalization of the registrant into
>a public benefit not-for-profit organization.

Respectfully John, this wasn't a DBA or an individual figuring the org name field on the old email template couldn't be blank. A class-A was allocated to a _purpose_. You've not only allowed but encouraged that valuable resource to be reassigned to an organization, this ARDC, and then treated the organization as a proxy for the purpose. No one asked you to do that. Nothing in the publicly vetted policies demanded that you attach organizations to the purpose-based allocations and certainly nothing demanded that you grant such organizations identical control over the resources as the control possessed by folks who were the intended direct recipients of assignments.

I guess you thought that would avoid having ARIN make judgement calls each time about whether the registrant for a purpose-based allocation was acting in the best interest of the purpose? It doesn't. It just makes ARIN look like a party to fraud.

Regards,
Bill Herrin


--
William Herrin