as one of those who think arin's approach to this is insulting and legally unjustified, i would be quite cheered by a more even-handed and less self-righteous example being set by ripe. So what do you propose how to tackle this?
i was supporting nigel saying that the board was working on a reasonable and fair contractual structure. i have nothing against offering holders of historical space reasonable contracts for keeping whois and rpki certificates and dns delegation. i do have a problem of confiscating their rights if they choose not to sign. instead of escalating threats and breaching the long established contract, perhaps hesitation to sign can be treated as problem in communication and maybe a weakness in common understanding of rights, concerns, ... we are all a community. we do have fairly common interests. perhaps there is a path building on the common ground instead of polarizing and us and them games.
I assume that you don't worry about requiring the contracts for *new* end-user assignments, but only worry about retroactively applying those?
i am more open than that. i hope/think there is a large space for agreement on formalizing the relationship(s) over historical space. take a look at section nine of the arin contract. it is that kind of thing to which i object. randy