> On 18 Sep 2022, at 2:28 PM, Owen DeLong via NANOG <nanog@nanog.org> wrote: > >> >> No formal agreement, but those involved in ARIN’s formation did indicate >> that at transition >> the existing registrations would be maintained without a need for agreement >> or fee. >> >> The ARIN Board has maintained that same position over the last 25 years – >> I’d expect that to continue similarly unless a strong reason emerged why >> that is no >> longer advisable and/or the community reached consensus on different >> approach. > > Again, I think you mean membership rather than community. Since this is > basically a board decision, > the membership would have to elect a board that has a different opinion.
Owen - Technically correct, but not necessarily the case operationally since the ARIN Board tends to pay attention to input that comes from the entire number registry community in the region (as opposed to just those who are ARIN members via number issuance or those legacy resources holders who become ARIN members via entry into an LRSA...) This level of attention to the entire community (even those legacy holders who opt not to participate as ARIN members) is reflected in having a policy development process open to all, discussions about a wide range of matters on the ARIN-ppml mailing list [an open list], and discussions of service-related matters (both suggestions and ARIN-initiated consultations) on the open-to-all arin-consult mailing list. If for some reason a new consensus were to emerge regarding the handling for legacy number resources, it would not necessarily take any change in Board composition to recognize that and direct implementation at ARIN accordingly. Thanks, /John John Curran President and CEO American Registry for Internet Numbers
