nanog mailing list archives
Re: 44/8
From: Matt Harris <matt () netfire net>
Date: Mon, 22 Jul 2019 15:40:42 -0500
On Mon, Jul 22, 2019 at 2:47 PM John Curran <jcurran () arin net> wrote:
In which case, I’d recommend contacting Hank Magnuski to obtain documentation of your particular interpretation, as there are no published policy documents which indicate anything other than an allocation from the general purpose IPv4 space for an "amateur packet radio" research network (and in particular nothing that would indicate that stewardship over the allocation should rest with any party other than the assigned contact for the block.)
I would point out here that "stewardship" and "ownership" are two very different things. "Stewardship" refers to the day to day care and feeding of something and generally does not confer the right to dispose of that thing. An example might be amateur radio spectrum. The ARRL is given some degree of stewardship over our spectrum here in the US, which is a community resource issued by the powers that be (globally the ITU, and in the case of the US specifically, the FCC) for those who take the time to get licensed. They can set limitations on its use, but they cannot sell it to Verizon. Thus, the ARRL is a steward of our amateur spectrum, which is not "owned" by any entity but rather is held in trust as a community resource by the FCC which allows for stewardship of that resource by the ARRL. Ownership would, of course, infer the right to dispose of that thing, including by selling it in whole or in part to a third party.
Current thread:
- Re: Feasibility of using Class E space for public unicast (was re: 44/8), (continued)
- Re: Feasibility of using Class E space for public unicast (was re: 44/8) William Herrin (Jul 26)
- Re: Feasibility of using Class E space for public unicast (was re: 44/8) Doug Barton (Jul 27)
- Feasibility of using Class E space for public unicast (was re: 44/8) bzs (Jul 27)
- Re: Feasibility of using Class E space for public unicast (was re: 44/8) johnl (Jul 27)
- Re: Feasibility of using Class E space for public unicast (was re: 44/8) Randy Bush (Jul 27)
- Re: Feasibility of using Class E space for public unicast (was re: 44/8) Stephen Satchell (Jul 27)
- Re: 44/8 John Curran (Jul 22)
- Re: 44/8 William Herrin (Jul 22)
- Re: 44/8 John Curran (Jul 22)
- Re: 44/8 Tom Beecher (Jul 22)
- Re: 44/8 Matt Harris (Jul 22)
- Re: 44/8 Matthew Kaufman (Jul 22)
- Re: 44/8 John Curran (Jul 22)
- Re: 44/8 Matthew Kaufman (Jul 22)
- Re: 44/8 John Curran (Jul 22)
- Re: 44/8 Owen DeLong (Jul 22)
- Re: 44/8 Valdis Klētnieks (Jul 22)
- Re: 44/8 John Curran (Jul 22)
- Re: 44/8 Owen DeLong (Jul 22)
- Re: 44/8 RDNS is still broken! Bryan Fields (Jul 22)
- Re: 44/8 Owen DeLong (Jul 22)