Re: "Leasing" of space via non-connectivity providers

[Jared Mauch <jared () puck nether net>]

On Feb 10, 2011, at 9:44 PM, John Curran wrote:

> On Feb 10, 2011, at 10:31 PM, Jack Bates wrote:
>
> > On 2/10/2011 8:15 PM, John Curran wrote:
> > > I'm not certain that you could rely on any organizations statements made today
> > > to provide any assurance that circumstances would not change in the future and
> > > result in the address space being returned to ARIN or transferred per current
> > > policy.
> >
> > An official statement from the DoD? I'm sure we could hold them to it as a community. Is it too much for us to ask 
> > the US government to give us assurance that we can safely utilize huge chunks of address space assigned to them for 
> > purposes such as LSN without fear? :)
>
> In organizations of all sizes, positions and policies change, 
> with revised statements as a result. One thing that does not
> change, however, is contractual commitments, and in this one
> case I can state that there is a commitment to return IPv4 
> address blocks to ARIN for reuse by the community if they no 
> longer needed.
>
> If you'd like to reserve a large block for purposes of LSN 
> without any concern of future address conflict, it would be 
> best to actually reserve it via community-developed policy.

I would have to say I agree.  Anything short of a posting in the federal register is just a statement of the short-term 
future.

US Gov 201: The federal register from the GPO is the primary source of rule making and RFI the government will use 
prior to regulation that is not purely legislative.  It may be worthwhile to subscribe, or periodically read/search.

- Jared