🚀 go-pugleaf

In comp.protocols.tcp-ip paul@No-UCE.anastrophe.com wrote:
>Your parti pris is only thinly disguised by the ad hominem. For want of a
>cogent argument...

If we could get this thread off of the ad hominem track for just a
minute and actually read the original posts you'll see there are some
critical problems being addressed, including:

 * Network Solutions split off ARIN without halving their fee,

 * ARIN has created a fee structure that bears no relationship to the
   cost of providing reverse DNS resolution and netblock registration,

 * The ARIN fees heavily discriminates against smaller ISPs, startups
   and businesses that do not require a /19,

 * ARIN has not adequately solicited input from the Internet community
   as was standard (RFC) procedure before Network Solutions took
   over the Internic,

 * The corporate structure of ARIN, like Network Solutions, gives
   the appearance of for-profit intent,

 * ARIN has not been consistent in the application of its own
   requirements for netblock allocation,

 * ARIN has not made any visible effort to reclaim the numerous
   /8 and /16 netblocks that are currently underutilized and in many
   cases completely unused,

 * ARIN has not addressed the problems with netblock hoarding and
   resale that are beginning to impact Internet based businesses and
   Internet commerce (with companies like Whole Earth Networks charging
   $1,000 per year for a class C, regardless of bandwidth),

 * ARIN controls a valuable public resource with no oversight or
   regulation.

If those are not enough reasons to justify Karl Denninger's proposal I
don't know what might be.

Roger Marquis