Randy, Can you give this list the source for your statement "arin policy wonks have zero intent to return any /8s recovered from the us military to the iana. and those /8s are specifically the subject of this lacnic proposal." As one of the original authors of this proposal which was drafted by persons from all regions, I really have trouble understanding that this is a LACNIC proposal. Ray -----Original Message----- From: address-policy-wg-admin@ripe.net [mailto:address-policy-wg-admin@ripe.net] On Behalf Of Randy Bush Sent: Thursday, October 01, 2009 18:32 To: Nigel Titley Cc: Gert Doering; Filiz Yilmaz; RIPE Address Policy Working Group Subject: Re: [address-policy-wg] 2009-01, Global Policy for the allocation of IPv4 blocks to Regional Internet Registries
ARIN has a MAY here, both for recovery and return-to-IANA. RIPE has a MUST here (it's still a "may" regarding recovery, but as soon as it is recovered, it MUST be returned to IANA). There appears to be a certain amount of doubt as to whether the wording has to be identical or merely substantially the same
< tact=off > < reality=on > underlying the words is substantial disagreement. arin policy wonks have zero intent to return any /8s recovered from the us military to the iana. and those /8s are specifically the subject of this lacnic proposal. randy