John,
If I can assist, please let me know.
-Marc
From: John Curran [mailto:jcur...@arin.net]
Sent: Tuesday, February 18, 2014 11:35 PM
To: Lindsey, Marc
Cc: arin-ppml@arin.net
Subject: Re: [arin-ppml] FYI -- RIPE-605 Services to Legacy Internet Resource
Holders
On Feb 18, 2014, at 11:07 PM
On Feb 18, 2014, at 11:07 PM, Lindsey, Marc
mailto:mlind...@lb3law.com>> wrote:
Hello John,
On Feb 17, 2014, at 5:30 PM you wrote:
“As noted earlier, RIPE 605 covers quite a bit of ground; could you be more
specific about what specific policy changes you are seeking?”
I agree that RIPE 605 co
Hello John,
On Feb 17, 2014, at 5:30 PM you wrote:
"As noted earlier, RIPE 605 covers quite a bit of ground; could you be more
specific about what specific policy changes you are seeking?"
I agree that RIPE 605 covers a lot of ground, and there are opportunities to
improve it. From my perspec
Kevin is setting up a conference call based on your availability, so yes. Thanks
Sent from my iPhone
> On Feb 17, 2014, at 9:54 PM, "Martin Hannigan" wrote:
>
> Let me know if we can work on this before the meeting.
>
> Side note, I noticed that in January 2013 there was a PDP
> simplification b
Let me know if we can work on this before the meeting.
Side note, I noticed that in January 2013 there was a PDP
simplification by the board. Another discussion happened in February
2013. There was an update by Bill Woodcock, the "PDP Simplification
Chair" and then nothing. Might be a good committ
On Feb 17, 2014, at 8:59 PM, Steve Noble
mailto:sno...@sonn.com>> wrote:
Hi John,
You were the one who eventually did fix the issue and I do appreciate that.
I don't believe that ARIN today will treat anyone differently than they treated
me, as the behavior is based on the rules and regulation
Whoops, dropped a word. There was a PDP Simplification Committee
established by the board. Sorely needed.
Best,
-M<
On Mon, Feb 17, 2014 at 9:53 PM, Martin Hannigan wrote:
> Let me know if we can work on this before the meeting.
>
> Side note, I noticed that in January 2013 there was a PDP
>
Hi John,
You were the one who eventually did fix the issue and I do
appreciate that.
I don't believe that ARIN today will treat anyone
differently than they treated me, as the behavior is based on the rules
and regulations that ARIN runs under. The bar is set too high to allow
objects t
Since I just received confirmation from the Primary I can now let you know it
will be Kevin as primary and Bill D as secondary. They will be reaching out to
you ASAP. Please let me know if there is anything else I can do at this time.
Thanks again
-john
Sent from my iPhone
On Feb 17, 2014, at
The shepherds will be notified in the morning. Our next meeting is this
Thursday so most likely not but we'll see. They should initially reach out to
to tomorrow, I will notify you as soon as they accept the appointment. Thanks.
Sent from my iPhone
On Feb 17, 2014, at 7:52 PM, "Martin Hannigan"
Who are the shepherds and should I expect to hear from them with plenty of
time available prior to the next AC meeting to make potential initial
adjustments?
Best,
Martin
On Monday, February 17, 2014, Scott Leibrand
wrote:
> Marc,
>
> Good input, thanks. Can you expand a bit on which aspects
Marc,
Good input, thanks. Can you expand a bit on which aspects of the LRSA some of
your clients find burdensome, and which aspects of RIPE 605 they find
preferable? As we (and particularly the AC shepherds) work with the proposal
originator on getting a clear problem statement and then figurin
On Feb 17, 2014, at 4:08 PM, Steve Noble
mailto:sno...@sonn.com>> wrote:
As a holder of both legacy and non-legacy ARIN objects, I have been subject to
ARIN's registry update blocks on _non-legacy_ objects that I rightfully control
and use.
Steve -
I'll be the first to admit you suffered ne
As a holder of both legacy
and non-legacy ARIN objects, I have been subject to ARIN's registry
update blocks on _non-legacy_ objects that I rightfully control and
use. I spent years (6 I believe) fighting with ARIN to update the
information on one of my ASNs while ARIN continued to bill me for
On Feb 17, 2014, at 2:53 PM, Lindsey, Marc
mailto:mlind...@lb3law.com>> wrote:
I advise several large legacy block holders. Some of them signed the LRSA, but
many have not. For them, the burdens imposed by the LRSA outweigh the
benefits. Some on the PPML have suggested that off-contract leg
I advise several large legacy block holders. Some of them signed the LRSA, but
many have not. For them, the burdens imposed by the LRSA outweigh the
benefits. Some on the PPML have suggested that off-contract legacy holders
don't sign up with ARIN because they want to be free-riders. But th
On Feb 13, 2014, at 8:47 AM, Martin Hannigan wrote:
> I will, but how can RIR's have legacy related policy like this be
> inconsistent across regions? I would argue its likely that it requires
> matching to sone extent here.
>
> How would people feel about pushing 605 as a "globally coordinat
I will, but how can RIR's have legacy related policy like this be
inconsistent across regions? I would argue its likely that it requires
matching to sone extent here.
How would people feel about pushing 605 as a "globally coordinated" policy?
Best,
Martin
On Thursday, February 13, 2014, John
On Thu, Feb 13, 2014 at 11:20 AM, David Conrad wrote:
> On Feb 13, 2014, at 10:47 AM, Martin Hannigan wrote:
> > I will, but how can RIR's have legacy related policy like this be
> inconsistent across regions? I would argue its likely that it requires
> matching to sone extent here.
> >
> > How
On Feb 13, 2014, at 10:47 AM, Martin Hannigan wrote:
> I will, but how can RIR's have legacy related policy like this be
> inconsistent across regions? I would argue its likely that it requires
> matching to sone extent here.
>
> How would people feel about pushing 605 as a "globally coordinat
On Feb 12, 2014, at 9:46 PM, Martin Hannigan wrote:
> I have a dumb question.
>
> Does 605 mean addresses are now property? Or only in some regions?
It would be best to ask RIPE about interpretation of their policies.
Thanks!
/John
John Curran
President and CEO
ARIN
__
I have a dumb question.
Does 605 mean addresses are now property? Or only in some regions?
Best,
Marty
On Wednesday, February 12, 2014, David Conrad wrote:
> John,
>
> On Feb 12, 2014, at 1:13 PM, John Curran >
> wrote:
> >> "The importance of maintaining accurate records in the ARIN databa
What's next? RIR competition? :-)
On Saturday, February 8, 2014, Owen DeLong wrote:
> I'm sure it insures something. I'm not sure an accurate registry is what
> it insures.
>
> Owen
>
> On Feb 7, 2014, at 18:07 , Martin Hannigan
> >
> wrote:
>
>
> RIPE-605 is now policy in the RIPE region.
>
>
I'm sure it insures something. I'm not sure an accurate registry is what it
insures.
Owen
On Feb 7, 2014, at 18:07 , Martin Hannigan wrote:
>
> RIPE-605 is now policy in the RIPE region.
>
> 1. Provides registry services to legacy holders without contractual
> requirement
>
> 2. Excludes l
RIPE-605 is now policy in the RIPE region.
1. Provides registry services to legacy holders without contractual
requirement
2. Excludes legacy holders from RIPE policy purview, past-present-future
3. Can revert a legacy block under contract back to a non-contract state
4. Reversion concept = "re
25 matches
Mail list logo
