[RE: Kremen VS Arin Antitrust Lawsuit - Anyone have feedback?]

Mailman List Mirror (Read Only)
1

   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 allocations were not property. ARIN is
merely continuing the former process with more structure
and public oversight. Are telephone numbers property?

In any case, since the conditions of the pre-ARIN allocations
were all informal, unrecorded and largely verbal, nobody
can prove that there was any kind of irrevocable grant.

--Michael Dillon

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"

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 UNIVERSITY in Mexico tryin to get
ip's from the mexican counterpart. Why is it that they involve lawyers,
ask you all your customers names and etc... This is more information than
I think they should be requiring. Any company that wishes to engage in
business as an ISP or provider in some capacity should be granted the
right to their own ip space. We cannot trust using ips swipped to us by
upstreams and the like. Its just not safe to do that and you lose control.

Actually, is there anyone else who shares these nightmares with me?
I brought up the lawsuit with Kremen and ARIN to see if this is a common
issue. What are your views, and can someone share nightmare stories?

Don't get me wrong, I think there has to be SOME due dilligence,
however their methodology is a bit hitlerish.

If you have had similar problems, contact me off list or on, if you wish.
I'd love to talk to you. AIM is preferred.

Chris Jester
Suavemente, INC.
SplitInfinity Networks
619-227-8845

AIM: NJesterIII
ICQ: 64791506

2

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 can say that 32 bit integers have monetary
value. There are more than 4 billiion of them and anyone can
use any number they choose. What is valuable is the unique
registration service which provides for a set of cooperating
entities to share a single 32 bit number space without collision.

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 UNIVERSITY in Mexico tryin to get
ip's from the mexican counterpart. Why is it that they involve lawyers,
ask you all your customers names and etc... This is more information than
I think they should be requiring. Any company that wishes to engage in
business as an ISP or provider in some capacity should be granted the
right to their own ip space. We cannot trust using ips swipped to us by
upstreams and the like. Its just not safe to do that and you lose control.

I have a great deal of difficulty identifying with this. The information ARIN
requests is, in my experience, reasonable and necessary for them to
accurately verify that your request is in compliance with allocation
policies. If you don't provide customer names, you can claim any number
of customers you want and fabricate as large an artificial network as
you like with no checks or balances.

Having said that, in my experience, a properly filled out template in
compliance with the policies has little or no difficulty getting addresses
issued by ARIN. If you don't like the policies, then, there is an open
process to change them. Having participated in that process for
a number of years and having worked actively to make it possible
to get address space for smaller entities (2002-3, Assignments
of /22, for example) and portable IPv6 assignments for end-users
(Policy 2005-1), I know it is possible to change ARIN policy. However,
like any form of governance, this is a slow process and requires the
building of consensus.

Actually, is there anyone else who shares these nightmares with me?
I brought up the lawsuit with Kremen and ARIN to see if this is a common
issue. What are your views, and can someone share nightmare stories?

There may be people who share your nightmares, but, I suspect it
would be less of a nightmare if you worked with the ARIN staff
instead of railing against them.

Don't get me wrong, I think there has to be SOME due dilligence,
however their methodology is a bit hitlerish.

This is completely opposite of my experience. There was a time
when I might have agreed with you, but, ARIN has changed a lot
and is a much friendlier organization today than even 5 years ago.

If you have had similar problems, contact me off list or on, if you wish.
I'd love to talk to you. AIM is preferred.

I've had the opposite experience across a number of
ARIN allocations and assignments for organizations of various
sizes.

Owen

3

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 have not taken the time to read the appropriate policy documents or supply adequate documentation who have had terrible difficulty getting resources assigned from all the RIRs, not just ARIN.

I have never yet met anybody who has followed the procedures (and who meets the criteria within the policy) who hasn't received exactly the resources they asked for. Actually, that's not true -- I know of several people who have received more than they asked for, since the RIRs in question noticed that the original request contained sufficient justification for a larger allocation.

Perhaps by "ARINS [sic] hardcore attitude" you mean their insistence that the policy be followed? My opinion on that is "Good Work, ARIN".

While my experience is mainly with APNIC and ARIN, it's not obvious to me that the other RIRs are substantially more difficult to deal with.

I am having an issue right now with a UNIVERSITY in Mexico tryin to get
ip's from the mexican counterpart. Why is it that they involve lawyers,
ask you all your customers names and etc...

You might advise the university in question to seek the help of someone who has actually read the policy documents (or to read them themselves -- the ARIN number resource policy manual, for example, is written in very straightforward language).

Joe

4

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"

Intrinsic or non-intrinsic value? It's an important distinction.

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 UNIVERSITY in Mexico tryin to get
ip's from the mexican counterpart.

I worked for a large-ish ISP for over seven years and made multiple requests for IP space from ARIN in that time. My experience with this was not at all bad. I did not find it to be like pulling teeth to get the space. As long as the request documentation is in order, it was not too bad.

I disagree with the notion that IP addresses are property.

jms

5

Having successfully been through the ARIN application process several times, on behalf of a few different organizations, and watched others both succeed and fail, it doesn't look all that complicated. Those who qualify under the policies, have or can generate good documentation, supply complete information as requested, and respond completely to any follow-up questions, tend to get through the process fairly quickly. Those who don't qualify, or who decide that the process is going to be too difficult and attempt to fudge, it often get into trouble.

Those who are successful in this business usually follow the process, because it's the path of least resistance. That's the practical answer. One of the legal questions in this case seems to be whether the policies are legal, and I suspect few of the active participants on this list have the necessary legal background to answer that.

-Steve

6

When I went after my own /21 after headaches with the numbers from my upstreams, UUNET and SBC, I sought help from a consultant (inexpensive, I might add) to let me know *exactly* what I needed to provide to ARIN to justify a private allocation. Unlike the original poster's claim, I didn't have to "open the kimono" wide. ARIN looked at my existing utilization, my basic numbering plan, my then-existing map of domain names to IP addresses, my application for one ASN, and after one back-and-forth they said "yes."

Today I'm a very happy multi-homed camper.

7

> 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.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"

1. I searched that PDF and it says nothing whatsoever
   about IP addresses, therefore your statement above
   is not true.

2. The court didn't just say that domain names are property
   like anything else, he said that some of the laws regarding
   property apply to domain names. But others do not.

3. Domain names are delegated to people who pay money to
   register a domain name for their exclusive use forever
   as long as they maintain their renewal payments.

4. IP addresses are assigned to organizations who have a
   JUSTIFIED technical requirement for those addresses in
   their network. Most addresses can only be used as long
   as they remain connected to the same upstream network.
   PI addresses can only be used as long as they are
   technically justified. If an organization sells their
   network or shuts it down, then they can no longer keep
   their IP addresses and there are hundreds of cases where
   those addresses have gone back to ARIN to be allocated
   to other networks.

Why is it that they involve lawyers,
ask you all your customers names and etc... This is more information

than

I think they should be requiring. Any company that wishes to engage in
business as an ISP or provider in some capacity should be granted the
right to their own ip space

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 truth. We have a level playing field and you
are asking for special privileges that other organizations
don't feel are necessary.

--Michael Dillon

8

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 commercial interest according to the academics and it was to all of our relief. aka we now have jobs working with it.

When you request IP addresses for the RIRs you are “leasing” them from the RIR. The same as it you lease a house or car. If you stop paying the lease the Sheriff comes and takes the property back if you do not give it back. Names in DNS can be “owned” as far as we know. This means that the party in this lawsuit should have used DNS as I indicated in an earlier e-mail and not naked IP addresses directly. This is basic contract law at least in Georgia that if the paperwork is written where you can assume the lease or you have to generate a new lease.

It is my understanding that ARIN favors the generation of a new lease for space for good technical reasons. If my company gets bought or buys a company the chances that the combined address space aggregate well in v4 is very small. If there is space available with better aggregation that is the block that ARIN would like to give my company.

Since both parties signed the agreement with a non assumable lease provision, even a California court will have a hard time forcing new provisions or new interpretation to an existing signed lease contract.

In Georgia the contracts are written so that any change of company ownership, bankruptcy or legal action will terminate the contract and the items would have to be returned to the other party who leased them.

If this lease contract had/has so much economic value than the parties should have come to a deal before a final court order to protect that value.

John (ISDN) Lee

** In the State of Georgia to espouse a legal opinion is practicing law and unless you have the union papers they can prosecute you for practicing law without a license.

Foot Note:

Executives at EBS (ENRON Broadband Services), the company that I worked for at the time did not like the ARIN policies and with the help of Enron corporate wanted to buy / take over ARIN and other RIRs so that they could generate a market for IP address blocks and extract greater value for them from the Internet community by setting up an IP trading desk. My boss and I indicated that we did not think that this was a good idea and while management put a project team together of about 20 lawyers to develop the concept they dropped it later because of more pressing legal issues.

The moral to this story is that if you do not like ARIN and want to get rid of it, which I do not want to do, what are you going to replace it with and how is that going to work or not work as the case may be.

Chris Jester wrote:

9

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 truth. We have a level playing field and you
are asking for special privileges that other organizations
don't feel are necessary.

--Michael Dillon

Michael,
  I think you are confusing ARIN membership with ARIN
resource recipient. The two are not synonymous although there
is a great deal of overlap.

  An end-user recipient is not necessarily an ARIN member.
An ARIN member is not necessarily a recipient. True, all
ISP recipients are ARIN members since that is an automatic
aspect of their subscriber status, providing much of the overlap,
but, not the complete definition.

Owen

10

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