Thus spake "Johnny Eriksson" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
"D'Arcy J.M. Cain" wrote:
If we were still calling central and asking "Hi Mabel, can you put me
through to Doc," no one would give a rat's ass about phone number
portability. Notice that no one is getting worked up about circuit
number portabil
On Wed, 13 Sep 2006, Johnny Eriksson wrote:
"D'Arcy J.M. Cain" wrote:
If we were still calling central and asking "Hi Mabel, can you put me
through to Doc," no one would give a rat's ass about phone number
portability. Notice that no one is getting worked up about circuit
number portability.
In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, Clay Fiske
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes
Some people may know your phone number off the top of their heads, but
most will have to look it up.
They will look mine up by reading my business card, reading my adverts,
calling up my web page (OK, they are just an onli
Johnny Eriksson wrote:
"D'Arcy J.M. Cain" wrote:
If we were still calling central and asking "Hi Mabel, can you put me
through to Doc," no one would give a rat's ass about phone number
portability. Notice that no one is getting worked up about circuit
number portability.
... or street n
"D'Arcy J.M. Cain" wrote:
> If we were still calling central and asking "Hi Mabel, can you put me
> through to Doc," no one would give a rat's ass about phone number
> portability. Notice that no one is getting worked up about circuit
> number portability.
... or street number portability. Th
On Wed, 13 Sep 2006 10:38:49 -0700
Clay Fiske <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Wed, Sep 13, 2006 at 12:17:59PM -0400, D'Arcy J.M. Cain wrote:
> >
> > I reiterate, no one knows me by my IP address. The software (DNS) they
> > use may and some people may need to make a change but the world in
> > g
I'm sure the same argument was used for telephone numbers when
technical folk were arguing against number portability.
Oh come on.
Where are we going?
You know perfectly well that phone numbers are not the same as IP.
Yes. I was making an analogy about what I suspect the technical
argu
On Wed, Sep 13, 2006 at 12:17:59PM -0400, D'Arcy J.M. Cain wrote:
>
> I reiterate, no one knows me by my IP address. The software (DNS) they
> use may and some people may need to make a change but the world in
> general does not need to know that. That's the whole point of DNS.
Let me adjust t
On Wed, 13 Sep 2006 17:53:04 +0200
Stephane Bortzmeyer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Wed, Sep 13, 2006 at 11:43:36AM -0400,
> D'Arcy J.M. Cain wrote
> a message of 20 lines which said:
>
> > No one knows me by my IP address. They know me by my email
> > address(es).
Huh? Are you trying t
Le 2006-09-13 à 11:43, D'Arcy J.M. Cain a écrit :
Notice that no one is getting worked up about circuit
number portability.
I don't know about that. I have always harboured a desire to visit
ZOWISAP0001 in person. I hear Zoowie Island is quite lovely at this
time of year.
This is not a
On Sep 13, 2006, at 8:43 AM, D'Arcy J.M. Cain wrote:
On Wed, 13 Sep 2006 05:37:05 -0700
David Conrad <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
I'm sure the same argument was used for telephone numbers when
technical folk were arguing against number portability.
Oh come on. You know perfectly well that ph
On Wed, Sep 13, 2006 at 11:43:36AM -0400,
D'Arcy J.M. Cain wrote
a message of 20 lines which said:
> No one knows me by my IP address. They know me by my email
> address(es).
It does not seem true. IP addresses are visible outside in:
* DNS servers when you get a zone delegation (the most
On Wed, 13 Sep 2006 05:37:05 -0700
David Conrad <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> I'm sure the same argument was used for telephone numbers when
> technical folk were arguing against number portability.
Oh come on. You know perfectly well that phone numbers are not the
same as IP. No one knows me
David Conrad wrote:
I'm sure the same argument was used for telephone numbers when technical
folk were arguing against number portability.
Number portability is a different can of worms, and many telephone companies
pushed for it. However, telephone numbers have been assigned in large block
On Sep 12, 2006, at 4:22 PM, Fred Baker wrote:
IP Addresses have always been treated as a resource of the network
since its inception. The fact that lawmakers don't understand or
care to understand doesn't change the facts of the case.
I'm sure the same argument was used for telephone numbe
On Sep 12, 2006, at 2:45 AM, Daniel Golding wrote:
What would establish IP addresses as some sort of ARIN-owned and
licensed community property? Well, winning a court case like this,
or congress passing a law.
Korea also has passed a law that any addresses assign to KRNIC become
the pro
>News of this case has been sent here before (by [EMAIL PROTECTED] back
>in July). Is anything really happening with the case?
It's case number 5:06-cv-02554-JW
They're still skirmishing about whether this is the right court to
file such a suit and stuff like that. Most recent order was on 8/2
Did a bit of looking and found this in relation to the ARIN case..
http://38.96.4.16/order.pdf
Chris Jester
Suavemente, INC.
SplitInfinity Networks
619-227-8845
AIM: NJesterIII
ICQ: 64791506
Look at this page: http://www.arin.net/cgi-bin/member_list.pl
Every one of those organizations has disclosed to ARIN
all their customer names, etc... That is the way things
are done. If you don't want to play ball like the rest
of us, then you are not going to get IP addresses. That's
the simple
On Mon, Sep 11, 2006 at 02:45:58PM -0400, Daniel Golding wrote:
> Joe makes a good point. Everyone is shouting "no one owns IP
> addresses", but that is proof by assertion.
...as is asserting that marketplace economics work for any and
all things. I lean toward low-regulation myself - why wo
IMHNLO ( In My Humble Non Legal Opinion)**
IP Addresses were created by UC, BBN, AT&T for/under the US
Government. They were managed and controlled by the Gov first with
DARPA and then Commerce etc until the management was deeded to ARIN.
The original Internet was going to be destroyed by
> > The reason that ARIN allocations are not property is
> > that pre-ARIN allocations were not property. ARIN is
> > merely continuing the former process with more structure
> > and public oversight. Are telephone numbers property?
> IP addresses appear to be property - - read http://news.findla
On Mon, 11 Sep 2006, Chris Jester wrote:
Also, what about ARINS hardcore attitude making it near impossible
to aquire ip space, even when you justify it's use? I have had
nightmares myself as well as MANY of my collegues share similar experiences.
I am having an issue right now with a UNIVERS
September 08, 2006 2:19 PM
> To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Cc: nanog@merit.edu
> Subject: Re: [Fwd: Kremen VS Arin Antitrust Lawsuit - Anyone have
> feedback?]
>
>
> The real fundamental flaw with this free-market approach to handling IP
> assignments is the fact that it will
Behalf Of joe mcguckin
Sent: Friday, September 08, 2006
1:37 PM
To: nanog@merit.edu
Subject: Re: [Fwd: Kremen VS Arin
Antitrust Lawsuit - Anyone have feedback?]
I read the complaint. I don't like the fact that a lot of my friends
are named in the suit, but I think there are some
p
On Mon, 11 Sep 2006, Chris Jester wrote:
Also, what about ARINS hardcore attitude making it near impossible
to aquire ip space, even when you justify it's use? I have had
nightmares myself as well as MANY of my collegues share similar experiences.
I am having an issue right now with a UNIVERSI
Owen,
I totally agree--
In the last 2 years I have worked with ARIN and received several
assignments for end users and NONE of them were difficult for the
assignment. I think the worst I saw was getting an outdated ORG ID
record changed!
The time from request to assignment in one case was less t
On 11-Sep-2006, at 13:44, Chris Jester wrote:
Also, what about ARINS hardcore attitude making it near impossible
to aquire ip space, even when you justify it's use? I have had
nightmares myself as well as MANY of my collegues share similar
experiences.
I have talked to many people who hav
On Mon, 11 Sep 2006, Chris Jester wrote:
IP addresses appear to be property - - read http://news.findlaw.com/
hdocs/docs/cyberlaw/kremencohen72503opn.pdf. Given that domain names
are property, IP addresses should be property, especially in
California where are constitution states "All things o
IP addresses appear to be property - - read http://news.findlaw.com/
hdocs/docs/cyberlaw/kremencohen72503opn.pdf. Given that domain names
are property, IP addresses should be property, especially in
California where are constitution states "All things of value are
property"
I'm not sure how you
>
>>Even if you assume that allocations made by ARIN are not property,
> it's
>> hard to argue that pre-ARIN allocations are not. They're not subject to
>> revocation and their grant wasn't conditioned on compliance with
> policies.
>
> The reason that ARIN allocations are not property is
> t
>Even if you assume that allocations made by ARIN are not property,
it's
> hard to argue that pre-ARIN allocations are not. They're not subject to
> revocation and their grant wasn't conditioned on compliance with
policies.
The reason that ARIN allocations are not property is
that pre-ARIN
> Since the public policy meetings and mailing lists where
> consensus is judged
> are open to any interested party, it is very hard to view this as an
> anti-competitive act in my
> opinion.
Kremen filed the suit on April 12, 2006. That is the
last day of the ARIN public meeting in Montreal.
> > Your statement about preferential treatment is factually
> > incorrect. Larger ARIN members do not get larger allocations.
> > It is the larger network infrastructures that get the larger
> > allocations which is not directly tied to the size of the
> > company. Yes, larger companies often hav
> 3) What's wrong with treating assignments like property and setting
> up a market to buy and sell them? There's plenty of precedent for this:
>
> Mineral rights, mining claims, Oil and gas leases, radio spectrum.
Before you start making inferences from an analogy,
you had better be sure th
Hank Nussbacher wrote:
And the same way that government forced telephone number portability, I
foresee one day government requiring IP number portability among ISPs in
order to increase competition. So all those SWIPS and PA assignments in
ARIN/RIPE/APNIc may one day be used to allow Acme Na
On Fri, 8 Sep 2006, Tony Li wrote:
And the same way that government forced telephone number portability, I
foresee one day government requiring IP number portability among ISPs in
order to increase competition. So all those SWIPS and PA assignments in
ARIN/RIPE/APNIc may one day be used to a
On September 8, 2006 at 16:28 [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Fergie) wrote:
>
> I like how Jack Bates framed it: The IP address space is a "community
> asset" and as such, the allocation of it needs to be done in a way
> which serves & benefits the Internet community at-large.
>
Which would form a st
On September 8, 2006 at 09:06 [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Matt Ghali) wrote:
>
> People who use the courts as a way to bleed their targets like this
> are vermin. Not surprising at all that this is all about some
> domain-squatting nonsense.
If a lawyer, any lawyer, sits you down in his office, lo
Chris,
The first item they need is a Network Engineer.
You do not have actual IP addresses for servers you have DNS entries.
In my non legal opinion the individual filling suit is out money
because of there lack of understanding of DNS entries versus IP
addresses. You can resolve thousands o
Niels Bakker wrote:
Address space policy has always been the result of a community
consensus. Just because that consensus has shifted over the years does
not mean that older entries in some database have suddenly developed
into property. All it means is that the community is very friendly for
On Fri, Sep 08, 2006 at 12:18:59PM -0700, David Schwartz wrote:
...
> Even if you assume that allocations made by ARIN are not property, it's
> hard to argue that pre-ARIN allocations are not. They're not subject to
> revocation and their grant wasn't conditioned on compliance with policies.
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Amazing how many people fail to trim quoted material,
but at least they aren't top-posting.
Sounds a lot like tragedy of the commons. To wit, the benefits
of having the IP space is given to the "owner", whereas the
resources are finite, and the cost
* [EMAIL PROTECTED] (David Schwartz) [Fri 08 Sep 2006, 21:20 CEST]:
Even if you assume that allocations made by ARIN are not
property, it's hard to argue that pre-ARIN allocations are not.
They're not subject to revocation and their grant wasn't conditioned
on compliance with policies.
Some
>> More to the point, how can ARIN refuse such an order?
I would guess ARIN's point is "It's not yours to give" and that the
original court overstepped their bounds and clearly misunderstood the
whole notion of IP address "ownership."
Also, I think your example is almost as flawed as mine, and t
On Fri, 8 Sep 2006, Mark Kent wrote:
Joe McGuckin typed:
2) Why does ARIN believe that it can ignore a court order?
Maybe because ARIN wasn't a party to the original proceedings
that generated that order?
Let's say you're eating lunch one day, minding your own business,
and a sheriff come
Mark,A more 'correct' analogy would be as follows: Let's say you win a judgement against another party where the court essentially awards you all the assets of the defendant. One of the assets is a paging company. So, you hike down to the FCC and want the radio licenses for the business
> Joe McGuckin typed:
> >> 2) Why does ARIN believe that it can ignore a court order?
> Maybe because ARIN wasn't a party to the original proceedings
> that generated that order?
> Let's say you're eating lunch one day, minding your own business,
> and a sheriff comes up with an official lookin
Joe McGuckin typed:
>> 2) Why does ARIN believe that it can ignore a court order?
Maybe because ARIN wasn't a party to the original proceedings
that generated that order?
Let's say you're eating lunch one day, minding your own business,
and a sheriff comes up with an official looking document an
Don't be so sure.
What probably _would_ police these willy-nilly announcements,
however, are prefix-length filters on the various ISP routers. :-)
And again, this could certainly lend itself to folks sic'ing their
lawyers on eacvh other in the name of anti-competitive lawsuits.
A mess ensues th
On Sep 8, 2006, at 10:33 AM, Stephen Sprunk wrote:
Thus spake <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
[ I said ]
The debate there will be around the preferential treatment that
larger
ARIN members get (in terms of larger allocations, lower per address
fees, etc), which Kremen construes as being anticompetitiv
>>> 3) What's wrong with treating assignments
like property and setting up a market to buy and sell them? There's plenty of
precedent for this:
>>> Mineral
rights, mining claims, Oil and gas leases, radio spectrum.
>>> If a given commodity is truly scarce,
nothing works as good as the f
The real fundamental flaw with this free-market approach to handling IP
assignments is the fact that it will further create an environment where
smaller (start-ups, small businesses) entities trying to acquire PI
space will face insurmountable challenges (eg, financial).
While I think the ma
Thus spake <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
[ I said ]
The debate there will be around the preferential treatment that
larger
ARIN members get (in terms of larger allocations, lower per address
fees, etc), which Kremen construes as being anticompetitive via
creating artificial barriers to entry. That may
3)
What's wrong with treating assignments like property and setting up a market
to buy and sell them? There's plenty of precedent for this:
Mineral
rights, mining claims, Oil and gas leases, radio spectrum.
If a given
commodity is truly scarce, nothing works as
3) What's wrong with
treating assignments like property and setting up a market to buy and sell them?
There's plenty of precedent for this:
Mineral
rights, mining claims, Oil and gas leases, radio spectrum.
If a given
commodity is truly scarce, nothing works as good as the free mark
I read the complaint. I don't like the fact that a lot of my friends are named in the suit, but I think there are somepoints worth discussing within the community:1) IP address blocks are not 'property' "Domains are not property. The assignee of a domain has no ownership interest" Network S
-- "Stephen Sprunk" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>The entire suit is predicated on the concept that IP addresses can
>be owned and traded like other property. The rest is a house of
>cards that will fall if ARIN can prove that to be incorrect -- and
>will probably stand if they can't.
[snip]
I l
The complaint was, at best, an entertaining read. IANAL.
As was mentioned earlier, it looks like Kremen's whole case is built on a
number of false assumptions:
1. Netblocks are the property of the organization once their assignment
request is approved by ARIN or other RIR.
Since this is f
Matt Ghali wrote:
Yes, at the least, wasting huge piles of ARIN's money on legal fees;
which is likely Kremen's entire intent, to "teach them a lesson" for not
handing over what he wanted.
Correction. Wasting huge piles of our money. I was hoping the money would go
towards a new template
Hopefully ARIN can recover their legal fees, so cash from members can be spent on IP space management.-brandonOn 9/8/06, Matt Ghali <
[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:On Fri, 8 Sep 2006, Gordon Cook wrote:> This is Gary Kremen owner of SEX dot com.
>> cohen stole sex.com from kremen and kremen sued and go
On Fri, 8 Sep 2006, Gordon Cook wrote:
This is Gary Kremen owner of SEX dot com.
cohen stole sex.com from kremen and kremen sued and got it back - it looks
like he is trying to force arin to give him cohen's IP assignments sounds
like a grudge match - but it is a shame that he might do ari
-- [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>> I am looking for anyone who has input on possibly the largest case
>> regarding internet numbering ever. This lawsuit may change the way
>> IP's are governed and adminstered. Comments on or off list please.
>
>My personal opinion is that this is yet another
>example
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
But in the end, IP addresses are not property, therefore
they cannot be assets and cannot be transferred. They can
only be kept if they are in use on network assets which are
transferred and which continue to be operational. And even
then, most people have no choice as t
> The debate there will be around the
> preferential treatment that larger ARIN members get (in terms of larger
> allocations, lower per address fees, etc), which Kremen construes as
> being anticompetitive via creating artificial barriers to entry. That
> may end up being changed.
Your sta
Thus spake Brandon Galbraith
Two questions regarding thisfor the list (slightly OT):
1) Has any sort of IP address ownership precedence been set in a US
court?
Not that I'm aware of, but I've never looked. I'm sure ARIN's lawyers
have.
2) Isn't ARIN considered a non-profit resource manag
Jon Lewis wrote:
In small quantities, and which tie you to particular providers. Shells
of companies have been bought (or just claimed) for their large,
especially pre-ARIN, PI-IP assignments. To a young ISP, a /16 for
example may seem like a lifetime supply of IP space, and save the
co
This is Gary Kremen owner of SEX dot com.cohen stole sex.com from kremen and kremen sued and got it back - it looks like he is trying to force arin to give him cohen's IP assignments sounds like a grudge match - but it is a shame that he might do arin collateral damage ===
On Fri, 8 Sep 2006 [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Since IP addresses are basically available free from
any ISP who sells Internet access services, this seems
In small quantities, and which tie you to particular providers. Shells of
companies have been bought (or just claimed) for their large, esp
is going on and wrote an interesting
read of a case...
Later,
J
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Friday, September 08, 2006 7:36 AM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: [Fwd: Kremen VS Arin Antitrust Lawsuit - Anyone
> I am looking for anyone who has input on possibly the largest case
> regarding internet numbering ever. This lawsuit may change the way
> IP's are governed and adminstered. Comments on or off list please.
My personal opinion is that this is yet another
example of ignorance leading to anger lead
Interesting read.
http://www.internetgovernance.org/pdf/kremen.pdf#search=%22kremen%20vs%20arin%22
I found this little gem in the "The Internet, IP addresses and Domain Names" section:
---
Recently a new form of Internet addressing has emerged, called Classless
Inter-Domain Routing (CIDR). In
Two questions regarding thisfor the list (slightly OT):1) Has any sort of IP address ownership precedence been set in a US court?2) Isn't ARIN considered a non-profit resource management/allocation organization? To my knowledge, there is no "marketplace" for IPs.
Thanks!-brandonOn 9/8/06, Chris Jes
Chris Jester wrote:
I am looking for anyone who has input on possibly the largest case
regarding internet numbering ever. This lawsuit may change the way
IP's are governed and adminstered. Comments on or off list please.
Anyone have experiences like are said in the lawsuit? I would love
to know
I am looking for anyone who has input on possibly the largest case
regarding internet numbering ever. This lawsuit may change the way
IP's are governed and adminstered. Comments on or off list please.
Anyone have experiences like are said in the lawsuit? I would love
to know if this is true or n
75 matches
Mail list logo
