From: Vab Goel[SMTP:vgoel@sprint.net] Sent: Saturday, March 08, 1997 10:18 PM
On Sat, 8 Mar 1997, Pete Kruckenberg wrote:
What kinds of guarantees are there that if someone buys it, that they will actually be able to get and keep this Class B?
If buyer & seller make a deal, with the current model buyer will be able to use it without any problem.
When what is actually happening differs wildly from documented policies, it is a pretty good sign that something needs to change. RFCs should either be followed or changed. Otherwise a crack is opened which may allow splinter groups to define their own policies in other areas (AlterNIC, etc.) - Jim Browning
On Sun, Mar 09, 1997 at 10:09:49AM -0800, Jim Browning wrote:
From: Vab Goel[SMTP:vgoel@sprint.net] Sent: Saturday, March 08, 1997 10:18 PM
On Sat, 8 Mar 1997, Pete Kruckenberg wrote:
What kinds of guarantees are there that if someone buys it, that they will actually be able to get and keep this Class B?
If buyer & seller make a deal, with the current model buyer will be able to use it without any problem.
When what is actually happening differs wildly from documented policies, it is a pretty good sign that something needs to change. RFCs should either be followed or changed. Otherwise a crack is opened which may allow splinter groups to define their own policies in other areas (AlterNIC, etc.) - Jim Browning
Under RFC2008, addresses delegated prior to October 1996 have been presumed to be, in many cases, "owned". RFC2008 both documented prior practice and introduced a new practice. RFC2008 is, IMHO, in many ways a watershed document as it applies to IP numbers and their assignment. Please read the RFC. Now if you got an address block with the STIPULATION that its not owned, then that's different. But absent a declaration for delegations which took place before October of last year, the *presumption* has been, in many cases, that delegations in fact do transfer ownership, and that has in fact been practiced throughout the Internet community. This is particularly true for assignments which would otherwise be portable (ie: /19s and larger) if made today. It CERTAINLY applies to a /16 in the Class "B" historical space; that IS globally valid under today's practice. You can change things going forward. You *can't* redefine history. It doesn't work that way. BTW, I'm one of the "good guys" in this debate folks -- before you start taking cheap shots. I returned an /11 (yep, 32 Class "B"s) when VideOcart Inc. folded, and didn't have to -- my name was listed as the coordinator. I knew that I would probably NEVER be able to justify the efficient utilization of that much space, and I had no interest in trying to sell or otherwise "deal" in it. -- -- Karl Denninger (karl@MCS.Net)| MCSNet - The Finest Internet Connectivity http://www.mcs.net/~karl | T1's from $600 monthly to FULL DS-3 Service | 99 Analog numbers, 77 ISDN, Web servers $75/mo Voice: [+1 312 803-MCS1 x219]| Email to "info@mcs.net" WWW: http://www.mcs.net/ Fax: [+1 312 803-4929] | 2 FULL DS-3 Internet links; 400Mbps B/W Internal
participants (2)
-
Jim Browning -
Karl Denninger