nanog mailing list archives
Re: Operational need for IP address space (Re: An update on the AfriNIC situation)
From: John Curran <jcurran () arin net>
Date: Tue, 31 Aug 2021 19:17:23 +0000
On 31 Aug 2021, at 2:23 PM, Owen DeLong <owen () delong com<mailto:owen () delong com>> wrote: Do we have parties who postulate their operational need based on entirely internal services, or services that live within virtual devices in a data center? Sure… and some of these are indeed legitimate and fulfilled per policy. We also have folks who get creative and make similar requests for purposes of obtaining address blocks from ARIN – absent any bona fide networking need –for subsequent monetization and these reviewed, revoked, and can be referred to criminal fraud proceedings. Yes, but in the ARIN region, you have also made it very clear that if needs change, ARIN will not attempt to revoke or reclaim space based on that change in need. Owen - ARIN has full authority to revoke number resources based on breach of our Registration Services Agreement (RSA) by a customer. We do exercise that authority with significant caution, but will do so when the situation warrants – and I would expect any other RIR to do the same in enforcing the particular terms of their own RSA agreement. As I understand it, AFRINIC has initiated a rather small number of resource reviews after completion of its most recent database audit – one might argue that they should have initiated more/fewer/none-at-all, but one cannot logically assert that AFRINIC lacks the right to enforce the plain language of their RSA agreement when a review indicates that a breach of that agreement has occurred. You also may not like that the AFRINIC RSA has recipients acknowledging that they are 'bestowed with an exclusive right of use of those number resources within the ambit of the “need” which it has justified in its application and for no other purpose during the currency of the present agreement’, but please recognize that "your client” apparently liked that provision well enough to agree to it in order to receive the address blocks – so there’s really not much more to be said in this regard. Thanks, /John John Curran President and CEO American Registry for Internet Numbers
Current thread:
- Re: An update on the AfriNIC situation, (continued)
- Re: An update on the AfriNIC situation Sabri Berisha (Aug 31)
- Re: An update on the AfriNIC situation Rubens Kuhl (Aug 31)
- Re: An update on the AfriNIC situation Sabri Berisha (Aug 31)
- Re: An update on the AfriNIC situation Rubens Kuhl (Aug 31)
- Re: An update on the AfriNIC situation Owen DeLong via NANOG (Aug 31)
- Re: An update on the AfriNIC situation Jon Lewis (Aug 31)
- Re: An update on the AfriNIC situation Owen DeLong via NANOG (Aug 31)
- Re: An update on the AfriNIC situation Christopher Morrow (Aug 30)
- Operational need for IP address space (Re: An update on the AfriNIC situation) John Curran (Aug 31)
- Re: Operational need for IP address space (Re: An update on the AfriNIC situation) Owen DeLong via NANOG (Aug 31)
- Re: Operational need for IP address space (Re: An update on the AfriNIC situation) John Curran (Aug 31)
- Re: Operational need for IP address space (Re: An update on the AfriNIC situation) Owen DeLong via NANOG (Aug 31)
- Re: An update on the AfriNIC situation Mark Tinka (Aug 30)
- Re: An update on the AfriNIC situation Rubens Kuhl (Aug 30)
- Re: An update on the AfriNIC situation Sabri Berisha (Aug 30)
- Re: An update on the AfriNIC situation Mike Hale (Aug 30)
- Re: An update on the AfriNIC situation Owen DeLong via NANOG (Aug 30)
- Re: An update on the AfriNIC situation John Kristoff (Aug 30)
- Re: An update on the AfriNIC situation Tom Beecher (Aug 30)
- Re: An update on the AfriNIC situation Randy Bush (Aug 30)
- Re: An update on the AfriNIC situation Mark Tinka (Aug 30)