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?
They would not be legaly obligated to do so by the current TRO. However note this is supposedly a temporay use of IP space. Some normal provider transtition might do end up with the same situation of routing the space. It could also be that the new provider is only used to route their new addresses while NAC in accordence with TRO continues to deliver service under the same conditons as the old agreement for the old address 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.
Did you mean it would not be a violation of the TRO? or where you saying the court counlt require others to break the currnet ARIN agreement/contact? In either case I would tend to agree but also am not a lawyer... In fact one might conclude that indeed the only way to currently prevent the customer from making a smooth transtion would be to stir up a bunch of ISP's and have *them* blackhole the customer purely on their own. Hmm what does "natural and probable consequence" mean again.... Brad