ARIN Comment on court case re portability of IP addresses

[dave () farber net]

___

Dave Farber  +1 412 726 9889



...... Forwarded Message .......
From: Steve Crocker <steve () shinkuro com>
To: Dave Farber <dave () farber net>
Date: Thu, 01 Jul 2004 14:51:20 -0400
Subj: ARIN Comment on court case re portability of IP addresses

I'm forwarding with Ray Plzak's permission his regarding the court case
allegedly involving portability of IP addresses.  Ray is President & CEO
of ARIN, the organization responsible for administering IP addresses in
North America.  

In brief, the case does not actually appear to be what was it claimed to
be.  The issue is considerably narrower and seems to be an ordinary
contractual dispute about how long it takes to move from one ISP to
another.  Both ARIN and ICANN are sensitive to this matter and would
take prompt action if the stability of the numbering system were at
risk.  Based on Ray's report, this doesn't appear to be such a case.

Steve


> > ############################################
> > On Tuesday, 29 June, I assigned the ARIN General Counsel the task to

> > review and prepare the necessary filings to either intervene 
> > formally or as an amicus in the case filed in the Superior Court of 
> > New Jersey Chancery Division for Morris County No: MRSC-87-04.  
> > ARIN's interest in reviewing this dispute was two fold:
> >
> > a. Determine whether the global and regional policies regarding the 
> > use of Internet Numbering Resources have been violated; and
> >
> > b. Determine whether the Registration Service Agreements which both 
> > the Plaintiff and the Defendant have signed with ARIN have been 
> > violated.
> >
> > The pleadings in this case have been carefully reviewed by the ARIN 
> > General Counsel.  As a result of that review we have preliminarily 
> > determined that neither the policies nor Registration Service 
> > Agreements have been violated. Therefore we have concluded that it 
> > is not appropriate for ARIN to intervene formally or as an amicus in

> > this case.
> >
> > The parties to the dispute are the Plaintiff, a company known as 
> > University Communications dba Pegasus Web Technologies, which 
> > provides web hosting and internet access services to customers, and 
> > its principal; and the Defendant, Net Access Corporation, an ISP 
> > that supplied number resources, obtained from ARIN, to the 
> > Plaintiff.
> >
> > ARIN has no interest in the 'who shot John' allegations between 
> > Plaintiff and Defendant regarding claims of breach of contract, 
> > breach of duty of good faith and fair dealing, and etc.
> >
> > Stripped to its essence, it is clear that Plaintiff no longer wants 
> > to do business in the long run with Defendant, and appears to be 
> > following ARIN and Internet customary procedures to renumber client 
> > accounts in a manner that will permit its internet customers to 
> > seamlessly continue their use of the Internet, whether the number 
> > used was originally issued to the Defendant, then provided to the 
> > specific member of the public by the Plaintiff, or is now being 
> > renumbered by the Plaintiff.
> >
> > It does take time to renumber, and it appears the real issue in this

> > suit is Plaintiff's attempt to obtain from the Court what it 
> > believes is sufficient time to accomplish this task. We express no 
> > opinion whether the Plaintiff might have moved faster in this regard

> > and avoided this dispute, because those facts are not fully known to

> > us. We have carefully reviewed the arguments provided and do not 
> > believe the arguments by the Plaintiff sought any relief inconstant 
> > with obtaining time to renumber, consistent with ARIN's and the 
> > Internet community's normal expectations. That is also the overall
> > thrust of the Order to Show Cause With Temporary Restraints
> > issued by the Court.
> >
> > There is language in that Order that if taken out of context of the 
> > arguments and spirit of the Order might have raised some concern.  
> > For example the Order does not clearly expire in several months 
> > consistent with the requested time to renumber. However, we have 
> > concluded it is not a problem when read in context and ARIN can at 
> > any point raise in any Court its objection to an open ended 
> > requirement that numbers supplied by business A to business B must 
> > be maintained in perpetuity and not renumbered.
> >
> > Therefore, we have concluded that the recent intense discussion was 
> > fueled by a characterization of the litigation by one of the parties

> > in a manner that was intended to and did raise community concerns, 
> > that we do not agree are implicated at this time. We will continue 
> > to monitor this and other litigation that might genuinely raise 
> > these concerns, and will alert the community to such cases when we 
> > find them so courts can be educated about these policies.
> >
> > Raymond A. Plzak
> > President & CEO
> > ARIN


-------------------------------------
You are subscribed as interesting-people () lists elistx com
To manage your subscription, go to
  http://v2.listbox.com/member/?listname=ip

Archives at: http://www.interesting-people.org/archives/interesting-people/