Re: [arin-ppml] nonsense about unrealized awareness from legacy resource holders

2022-04-14 Thread Jo Rhett
> During the time in question when legacy resources without a contract were > given, the Internet was a government project and those resources were > government property. While commercial use of the NSFNet was rampant, it was > explicitly illegal until 1992 when NSFNet stopped being funded direc

Re: [arin-ppml] nonsense about unrealized awareness from legacy resource holders

2022-04-14 Thread Martin Hannigan
On Thu, Apr 14, 2022 at 21:09 Jo Rhett wrote: > On Apr 14, 2022, at 10:17 AM, Martin Hannigan wrote: > > I found a rendition of the facts below and since John is talking about > facts from history this was fun to add. I also forget to mention Chetty > Ramananathan as part of The World team from

Re: [arin-ppml] nonsense about unrealized awareness from legacy resource holders

2022-04-14 Thread Martin Hannigan
On Thu, Apr 14, 2022 at 20:21 Jo Rhett wrote: > On Apr 14, 2022, at 3:12 AM, Jon Lewis wrote: > > Before ARIN existed, InterNIC also assigned ASNs and IP space. This is > where lots of legacy assignments come from. It's where the ASN assigned to > the company I was a part owner of came from.

Re: [arin-ppml] nonsense about unrealized awareness from legacy resource holders

2022-04-14 Thread Jo Rhett
On Apr 14, 2022, at 3:12 AM, Jon Lewis wrote: > Before ARIN existed, InterNIC also assigned ASNs and IP space. This is where > lots of legacy assignments come from. It's where the ASN assigned to the > company I was a part owner of came from. It's too bad we didn't have the > foresight to al

Re: [arin-ppml] nonsense about unrealized awareness from legacy resource holders

2022-04-14 Thread Martin Hannigan
On Thu, Apr 14, 2022 at 8:39 AM Martin Hannigan wrote: > > > On Thu, Apr 14, 2022 at 05:44 Jo Rhett wrote: > >> On Wed, Apr 13, 2022, at 11:03 AM, John Santos wrote: >> > [ clip] > > >> > On 4/13/2022 12:51 AM, Jo Rhett wrote: >> > The DMV is a government agency and the public roads belong to th

Re: [arin-ppml] nonsense about unrealized awareness from legacy resource holders

2022-04-14 Thread Martin Hannigan
On Thu, Apr 14, 2022 at 05:44 Jo Rhett wrote: > On Wed, Apr 13, 2022, at 11:03 AM, John Santos wrote: > [ clip] > > On 4/13/2022 12:51 AM, Jo Rhett wrote: > > The DMV is a government agency and the public roads belong to the > government. > > ARIN is NOT a government agency, and the Internet is

Re: [arin-ppml] nonsense about unrealized awareness from legacy resource holders

2022-04-14 Thread Jon Lewis
On Thu, 14 Apr 2022, Jo Rhett wrote: When my company was granted its Class C, I wrote the letter to the InterNIC and the response was addressed to my, but the Class C was granted to my company, not to me, and there is no way it is my personal property. InterNIC? Are you certain you aren't conf

Re: [arin-ppml] nonsense about unrealized awareness from legacy resource holders

2022-04-14 Thread Jo Rhett
On Wed, Apr 13, 2022, at 11:03 AM, John Santos wrote: > What is poppycock is this ignorant post. That's a directed insult which is a violation of the rules, and really not appropriate in discussion. > On 4/13/2022 12:51 AM, Jo Rhett wrote: > The DMV is a government agency and the public roads be

Re: [arin-ppml] nonsense about unrealized awareness from legacy resource holders

2022-04-13 Thread John Santos
What is poppycock is this ignorant post. On 4/13/2022 12:51 AM, Jo Rhett wrote: On Tue, Apr 12, 2022, at 4:33 PM, John Curran wrote: It’s much more basic than that - legacy resource holders received their blocks from parties who were issuing them pursuant to agreements with the US Government

Re: [arin-ppml] nonsense about unrealized awareness from legacy resource holders

2022-04-12 Thread Jo Rhett
> I also agree that it is time to end that fiction, and to put these holders on > notice that these resources might be recovered. However, I do measure the > value of the recovery against the worth of the resources, and find that > eventually that money would be better spent going to IPv6. Pr

Re: [arin-ppml] nonsense about unrealized awareness from legacy resource holders

2022-04-12 Thread hostmaster
I agree with you regarding these persons. These legacy holders, who would have to have enough knowledge to route communications using the assigned addresses, but not enough knowledge of what happened and who currently takes care of these legacy assignments after they received them on the back

[arin-ppml] nonsense about unrealized awareness from legacy resource holders

2022-04-12 Thread Jo Rhett
On Tue, Apr 12, 2022, at 4:33 PM, John Curran wrote: > It’s much more basic than that - legacy resource holders received their > blocks from parties who were issuing them pursuant to agreements with the US > Government to do so, and under circumstances where the corresponding > responsibilities