On Tue, 22 Jun 2004, David Schwartz wrote: > > > > In other words, customer is asking a court to rule whether or not IP space > > should be portable, when an industry-supported organization (ARIN) has > > made policy that the space is in fact not portable. It can be further > > argued that the court could impose a TRO that would potentially negatively > > affect the operation of my network. > > A court will likely decide this based upon the terms of your contract and > what the court thinks is fair. They will likely give very little > consideration to common practice or ARIN's rules.
Actually, I don't think that's the case. ARIN still owns the numbers, NAC is just leasing them. Therefore, ARINs rules supercede anything contractual between NAC and the customer. For instance, if what you say were true, all an ISP would have to do in order to "sell" their IP space is to create a contract stating that they are doing so. Contracts are rarely as binding as people think they are. Of course, I'm no lawyer, I just hate paying them. Andy --- Andy Dills Xecunet, Inc. www.xecu.net 301-682-9972 ---
