On Tue, 29 Jun 2004 12:27:43 -0400 "Hannigan, Martin" <hannigan@verisign.com> wrote:
Why would the other side(new provider) violate ARIN policy and route the space? The court order doesn't apply to ARIN, or the new provider. I'd say it would be a violation of the agreement, but I'm not a lawyer. Just a thought.
i suspect this will turn out to be a non-issue, even of the new provider routes the blocks and nac.net strictly obeys the requirements of the TRO. the blocks broken out of the aggregates are probably (i haven't looked) likely to be dropped by filters at many large providers, which will seriously limit their utility. so i think both nac.net and the "new provider" should do the obvious TRO compliant things while nac.net hashes it out in court. the customer will likely discover somewhere down the line that they've shot themselves in the foot, as they won't be able to afford to sue _everyone_ who is dropping their announcements as part of normal filter policy going back many years. i don't think anyone should be changing policies in response to this. let it play out in court. for most ISPs, "change nothing" seems like the smart response. richard -- Richard Welty rwelty@averillpark.net Averill Park Networking 518-573-7592 Java, PHP, PostgreSQL, Unix, Linux, IP Network Engineering, Security