On Mar 24, 2011, at 9:59 PM, Jimmy Hess wrote:
So I wonder.... rhetorically speaking.. what happens when a bankruptcy court accidentally sells something that doesn't actually exist, ... Because that's what IP addresses are. Totally worthless unless community participants voluntarily route traffic for those IPs to the assignee.
There are a small number of examples, of intellectual property that exists solely by convention and yet has value. But you're correct: the property structure of IP addresses is ambiguous. We never had to define it because we had free supply, but times are changing.
Meaning if MS has an RSA in force, all their resources should be compliant with ARIN policies, and all transfer policies should be followed with regards to justified need.
If I recall correctly, the ARIN RSA only applies to resources acquired from ARIN. It's a contract for ARIN services and doesn't cover legacy blocks, blocks from other RIRs, etc - it doesn't automatically extend ARIN's authority. On Mar 24, 2011, at 10:34 PM, Marshall Eubanks wrote:
If ARIN reassigned the space, and Microsoft continued to announce it anyway, would either announcing entity be have enough of a critical mass that the conflict wouldn't matter to it ?
I would submit that any address assignments with continual major operational issues arising from assignment conflicts would not be very attractive.
I also don't think that that would be good for the Internet.
I agree. Which is why ARIN should keep their Whois updated with accurate data, rather than fighting for control of resources beyond RSA scope. Cheers, -Benson