![nanog logo](/images/nanog-logo.png)
nanog mailing list archives
Re: "Leasing" of space via non-connectivity providers
From: Owen DeLong <owen () delong com>
Date: Sat, 5 Feb 2011 20:44:39 -0800
On Feb 5, 2011, at 8:31 PM, Benson Schliesser wrote:
On Feb 5, 2011, at 1:01 PM, Bill Woodcock wrote:On Feb 5, 2011, at 10:27 AM, bmanning () vacation karoshi com wrote:If I justified an allocation 20 years ago, under the then current policy, it's presumptuous to presume the power of expropriation.No one presumes it, and a lot of us are in the same boat as you, some of the addresses we're using predating the RIR system. That said, there will always be people who will turn up on the mailing list, participating in the public policy process, who are not in that boat, and whose interests differ significantly, and who will speak in favor of those interests. And the consensus of the public, the people who participate in the public policy process, is what decidesThe ARIN community decides ARIN policy. That policy doesn't inherently reflect "community standards" in the broader sense, or inherently align with the law for that matter. If the ARIN community were to instruct ARIN to operate in an illegal capacity, for instance, the fact that a "community" reached "consensus" on the matter would be a ridiculous defense. Cheers, -Benson
We have a lawyer that does an excellent job of advising us on legal concerns in our policy proposals. That is part of the policy process. As such, yes, they do somewhat inherently align with the law. As to reflecting community standards, I'm not sure what better measure of "community standards" one could propose beyond a bottom-up open consensus driven policy process such as what we have today. If you know a better way to make policy reflect community standards, there is the ACSP and I'm sure that the PDP committee would be very happy to get your input. Owen
Current thread:
- Re: "Leasing" of space via non-connectivity providers, (continued)
- Re: "Leasing" of space via non-connectivity providers Alexander Harrowell (Feb 11)
- Re: "Leasing" of space via non-connectivity providers John Curran (Feb 10)
- Re: "Leasing" of space via non-connectivity providers Joel Jaeggli (Feb 10)
- Re: "Leasing" of space via non-connectivity providers Jared Mauch (Feb 10)
- Re: "Leasing" of space via non-connectivity providers Mark Andrews (Feb 10)
- Re: "Leasing" of space via non-connectivity providers Robert Bonomi (Feb 10)
- Re: "Leasing" of space via non-connectivity providers Benson Schliesser (Feb 05)
- Re: "Leasing" of space via non-connectivity providers John Curran (Feb 05)
- Re: "Leasing" of space via non-connectivity providers Benson Schliesser (Feb 05)
- Re: "Leasing" of space via non-connectivity providers Owen DeLong (Feb 05)
- Re: "Leasing" of space via non-connectivity providers Owen DeLong (Feb 05)
- Re: "Leasing" of space via non-connectivity providers Owen DeLong (Feb 05)
- Re: "Leasing" of space via non-connectivity providers Jack Bates (Feb 05)
- Re: "Leasing" of space via non-connectivity providers John Levine (Feb 05)
- Re: "Leasing" of space via non-connectivity providers Jack Bates (Feb 05)
- Re: "Leasing" of space via non-connectivity providers John R. Levine (Feb 05)
- Re: "Leasing" of space via non-connectivity providers Jack Bates (Feb 05)
- Re: "Leasing" of space via non-connectivity providers Jon Lewis (Feb 05)
- RE: "Leasing" of space via non-connectivity providers Aaron Wendel (Feb 05)
- Re: "Leasing" of space via non-connectivity providers John Levine (Feb 05)
- Re: "Leasing" of space via non-connectivity providers William Pitcock (Feb 05)