One approach that may generate some visibility of the issue - and possibly some action, or an investigation - would be to file a complaint with ARIN, the responsible entity fir all North American IP address allocations. See arin.net Bill Semich, K1CSL
________________________________ From: 44Net 44net-bounces+bsemich=msn.com@mailman.ampr.org on behalf of 44net-request@mailman.ampr.org 44net-request@mailman.ampr.org Sent: Friday, August 16, 2019 3:00:00 PM To: 44net@mailman.ampr.org 44net@mailman.ampr.org Subject: 44Net Digest, Vol 8, Issue 133
Send 44Net mailing list submissions to 44net@mailman.ampr.org
To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit https://nam02.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fmailman.am... or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to 44net-request@mailman.ampr.org
You can reach the person managing the list at 44net-owner@mailman.ampr.org
When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific than "Re: Contents of 44Net digest..."
44 Net is not part of ARIN
There was no fraud.
On Sat, Aug 17, 2019, 06:54 J. William Semich via 44Net < 44net@mailman.ampr.org> wrote:
One approach that may generate some visibility of the issue - and possibly some action, or an investigation - would be to file a complaint with ARIN, the responsible entity fir all North American IP address allocations. See arin.net Bill Semich, K1CSL
Because the buyer uses ARIN. Net 44 predates ARIN and has not joined ARIN, as I understand it. I also have similar address space myself.
On Sat, Aug 17, 2019 at 7:45 AM Jim Popovitch via 44Net < 44net@mailman.ampr.org> wrote:
On Sat, 2019-08-17 at 07:28 -0700, John D. Hays via 44Net wrote:
44 Net is not part of ARIN
How then was ARIN involved in the sale of a 44net block?
-Jim P. _________________________________________ 44Net mailing list 44Net@mailman.ampr.org https://mailman.ampr.org/mailman/listinfo/44net
On Sat, 2019-08-17 at 08:20 -0700, K7VE - John via 44Net wrote:
Because the buyer uses ARIN. Net 44 predates ARIN and has not joined ARIN, as I understand it. I also have similar address space myself.
Do you possibly mean that 44net|ARDC didn't have a normal service contract with ARIN?
Who manages your whois/rDNS/etc services for your similar address space?
-Jim P.
Correct.
The AMPR 44 address space was assigned for amateur radio use before ARIN was started.
Address space assigned before ARIN is known as Legacy Assignment and is not controlled by ARIN policies.
A party wishing to transfer control of a legacy IP space (or portion thereof) can apply to ARIN to record the transfer.
When a party registers something with ARIN, that party must signed an agreement with ARIN to be bound by the terms of the ARIN services agreement.
So the buyer and the portion they purchased is under ARIN policies via whatever Legacy Registration Services Agreement (LRSA) that entity may have/has negotiated with ARIN.
On Sat, Aug 17, 2019 at 8:48 AM Jim Popovitch via 44Net < 44net@mailman.ampr.org> wrote:
On Sat, 2019-08-17 at 08:20 -0700, K7VE - John via 44Net wrote:
Because the buyer uses ARIN. Net 44 predates ARIN and has not joined
ARIN,
as I understand it. I also have similar address space myself.
Do you possibly mean that 44net|ARDC didn't have a normal service contract with ARIN?
Who manages your whois/rDNS/etc services for your similar address space?
-Jim P.
44Net mailing list 44Net@mailman.ampr.org https://mailman.ampr.org/mailman/listinfo/44net
There was NO FRAUD! There's just a minority of folks who disagree with the process used (and have other axes to grind with certain members of the ARDC board).
Those people would probably have NEVER been satisfied with ANY process that might have been used by the ARDC. They are what I call members of the C.A.V.E. committee
(Citizens Against Virtually Everything)!
Please read the FAQ at https://www.ampr.org/amprnet/ and give it careful consideration before spreading rumors and falsehoods.
By the way, ARIN was most certainly involved in the transaction as they made the mistakes that temporarily broke reverse DNS.
On Sat, Aug 17, 2019 at 8:51 AM J. William Semich via 44Net < 44net@mailman.ampr.org> wrote:
One approach that may generate some visibility of the issue - and possibly some action, or an investigation - would be to file a complaint with ARIN, the responsible entity fir all North American IP address allocations. See arin.net Bill Semich, K1CSL
From: 44Net 44net-bounces+bsemich=msn.com@mailman.ampr.org on behalf of 44net-request@mailman.ampr.org 44net-request@mailman.ampr.org Sent: Friday, August 16, 2019 3:00:00 PM To: 44net@mailman.ampr.org 44net@mailman.ampr.org Subject: 44Net Digest, Vol 8, Issue 133
Send 44Net mailing list submissions to 44net@mailman.ampr.org
To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit
https://nam02.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fmailman.am... or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to 44net-request@mailman.ampr.org
You can reach the person managing the list at 44net-owner@mailman.ampr.org
When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific than "Re: Contents of 44Net digest..." _________________________________________ 44Net mailing list 44Net@mailman.ampr.org https://mailman.ampr.org/mailman/listinfo/44net
On my side, even if I respect a lot people that think there is foul play with this situation, I think that the moove was the best that could happen. Wat we need to do is check that the resources that used to be Ip adress are now used for amateur radio. I've been into a lot of organisation that use members money as president of a ham club, director of a ham federation, director into a union (still is) and many more other group.
There is only one thing we need to do, and it is just taking care of business. Looking into account redition, asking question, the real one, not just trying to "look like" asking question.
We have a project in my region that is waiting on the right financing to start. This would be a great project that would shape the capacity of one of the largest piece of land in Canada to provide real support in case of emergency. Ham would be able to use that project for so many project that one can only imagine 10% of what it could really be used for.
I just cant wait for the method to provide request for financing be open.
Pierre VE2PF
On 8/17/19 7:59 PM, pete M via 44Net wrote:
We have a project in my region that is waiting on the right financing to start. This would be a great project that would shape the capacity of one of the largest piece of land in Canada to provide real support in case of emergency. Ham would be able to use that project for so many project that one can only imagine 10% of what it could really be used for.
I just cant wait for the method to provide request for financing be open.
The argument here is the ends justify the means.
If a person or org takes money from ARDC, Inc. they are just as culpable in the fraud as the ARDC board is.
I will just say that I strongly disagree with you. The resource is still here and available to all ham operator. It was transformed into some cash that will be use for all ham operator
You can still think they did wrong. But for me. In the next weeks. Maybe a few months. If they don't open for request, now I would agree with you. Till then I give them the chance to do as they told us. ________________________________ From: 44Net 44net-bounces+petem001=hotmail.com@mailman.ampr.org on behalf of Bryan Fields via 44Net 44net@mailman.ampr.org Sent: Saturday, August 17, 2019 8:36:39 PM To: 44net@mailman.ampr.org 44net@mailman.ampr.org Cc: Bryan Fields Bryan@bryanfields.net Subject: Re: [44net] Another approach Re: Fraud
On 8/17/19 7:59 PM, pete M via 44Net wrote:
We have a project in my region that is waiting on the right financing to start. This would be a great project that would shape the capacity of one of the largest piece of land in Canada to provide real support in case of emergency. Ham would be able to use that project for so many project that one can only imagine 10% of what it could really be used for.
I just cant wait for the method to provide request for financing be open.
The argument here is the ends justify the means.
If a person or org takes money from ARDC, Inc. they are just as culpable in the fraud as the ARDC board is.
-- Bryan Fields
727-409-1194 - Voice http://bryanfields.net
_________________________________________ 44Net mailing list 44Net@mailman.ampr.org https://mailman.ampr.org/mailman/listinfo/44net
Bryan, What would you like to happen?
1. The deal is done you are not going to get the address space back. 2. No laws are being broken as far as I can see so no one is going to go to prison. 3. If you want to continue to use IP on Amateur Radio (well IPv4) you have to deal with these people 4. the board elects its-self. They are not going to resign.
Dave G4UGM
-----Original Message----- From: 44Net 44net-bounces+dave.g4ugm=gmail.com@mailman.ampr.org On Behalf Of Bryan Fields via 44Net Sent: 18 August 2019 01:37 To: 44net@mailman.ampr.org Cc: Bryan Fields Bryan@bryanfields.net Subject: Re: [44net] Another approach Re: Fraud
On 8/17/19 7:59 PM, pete M via 44Net wrote:
We have a project in my region that is waiting on the right financing to start. This would be a great project that would shape the capacity of one of the largest piece of land in Canada to provide real support in case of emergency. Ham would be able to use that project for so many project that one can only imagine 10% of what it could really be
used
for.
I just cant wait for the method to provide request for financing be
open.
The argument here is the ends justify the means.
If a person or org takes money from ARDC, Inc. they are just as culpable
in the
fraud as the ARDC board is.
-- Bryan Fields
727-409-1194 - Voice http://bryanfields.net
44Net mailing list 44Net@mailman.ampr.org https://mailman.ampr.org/mailman/listinfo/44net
One approach that may generate some visibility of the issue - and possibly some action, or an investigation - would be to file a complaint with ARIN, the responsible entity fir all North American IP address allocations.
I made just such a report to ARIN shortly after this came to light. The basic argument is that the original allocation was not made to the individuals but to the community, and the individuals (and later successor organisation ARDC) managed the addresses in trust for the community. They never owned it and therefore had no ability to sell it. This interpretation of the nature of the original allocation is supported by people who were around at the time, as well as the treatment of similar allocations e.g. SATNet, but of course explicit documentation of this is thin.
The secrecy around the sale is very worrying. Keeping the negotiations and precise terms of the sale confidential is somewhat understandble, but keeping secret the idea that selling any part of the space was even possible and being contemplated is a lot harder to understand. It suggests that ARDC knew that this was not ok or at least that they did not want to allow discussion within the community. Neither reflects well on their stewardship of this shared resource.
I do not know what the outcome of the ARIN investigation will be. They have followed up with me to ask for more information, which I gave to them.
At this point, is it possible to reverse the sale? Technically it might be but it's hard to see how it could happen without expensive, lengthy and damaging legal action. And ARDC now have very deep pockets. The best that we can hope for is that ARDC becomes transparent and accountable to the amateur radio community. It is not enough to say that it's a charity regulated by the IRS because it's not the IRS' resources that it's managing, it's ours.
For ARDC to become accountable would mean changing the byelaws to have a concept of membership and an elected board. The obvious definition of membership is holders of an address allocation. Because every amateur radio operator is eligible for an allocation, this should be sufficiently representative.
73s VE3HW
A reading of NANOG Mailing List https://mailman.nanog.org/pipermail/nanog/ (specifically July) will show that the vetting of the sale was undertaken and approved by ARIN. Specifically look at postings by John Curran, CEO of ARIN.
The sale is final. ARDC is operating according to their bylaws and charter.
------------------------------ John D. Hays - K7VE Kingston, WA http://k7ve.org/blog http://twitter.com/#!/john_hays http://www.facebook.com/john.d.hays
A reading of NANOG Mailing List will show that the vetting of the sale was undertaken and approved by ARIN. Specifically look at postings by John Curran, CEO of ARIN.
John, I'm well aware of the NANOG thread. In fact it was at John Curran's suggestion that I made a fraud report so that they could investigate. As far as I am aware, that investigation is ongoing.
ARDC is operating according to their bylaws and charter.
That may be. However there is a credible case to be made that they are in breach of their fiduciary duties with respect to 44/8. It is possible for them to remedy that and I gave one suggestion about how they might begin do so.
Best wishes, William VE3HW
It’s equally viable to claim that ARDC could be in breach of their fiduciary duty if they did not sell off the excess inventory of IPv4 address space, while it still had a substantial monetary value.
Would you sooner have a few million buggy whips in inventory, with no market for them, after the introduction of the automobile, or the opportunity to monetize your excess buggy whips while they still have value?
Randy W3RWN/ VE3RWN
On Wed, Aug 21, 2019 at 9:46 AM William Waites via 44Net < 44net@mailman.ampr.org> wrote:
A reading of NANOG Mailing List will show that the vetting of the sale was undertaken and approved by ARIN. Specifically look at postings by John Curran, CEO of ARIN.
John, I'm well aware of the NANOG thread. In fact it was at John Curran's suggestion that I made a fraud report so that they could investigate. As far as I am aware, that investigation is ongoing.
ARDC is operating according to their bylaws and charter.
That may be. However there is a credible case to be made that they are in breach of their fiduciary duties with respect to 44/8. It is possible for them to remedy that and I gave one suggestion about how they might begin do so.
Best wishes, William VE3HW _________________________________________ 44Net mailing list 44Net@mailman.ampr.org https://mailman.ampr.org/mailman/listinfo/44net
On Aug 21, 2019, at 12:59, Randy Neals via 44Net 44net@mailman.ampr.org wrote:
It’s equally viable to claim that ARDC could be in breach of their fiduciary duty if they did not sell off the excess inventory of IPv4 address space, while it still had a substantial monetary value.
Correct. It was worthless when they got it in 1980ish, it will be worthless in the future. Right now it is not worthless, so they sold part of it and kept the rest for us to play with. But they (ARDC) are/were under no obligation to anyone or anything to hang on to it. They could have sold the entire 44/8 space for probably 10 times the money if they wanted to. We all are beneficiaries of their good graces. None of us here are *entitled* to anything.
-k9dc
On Wed, 21 Aug 2019 10:53:18 +0100, William Waites via 44Net 44net@mailman.ampr.org wrote:
I made just such a report to ARIN shortly after this came to light. The basic argument is that the original allocation was not made to the individuals but to the community, and the individuals (and later successor organisation ARDC) managed the addresses in trust for the community. They never owned it and therefore had no ability to sell it. This interpretation of the nature of the original allocation is supported by people who were around at the time, as well as the treatment of similar allocations e.g. SATNet, but of course explicit documentation of this is thin.
If your theory that the original assignees had no right of ownership, in trust or otherwise, is true; then it is equally true that the original assignment by IANA was invalid. (AFAIK, Jon Postel WAS IANA.) If the assignment of net 44 was invalid then ALL assignments by IANA are invalid. It can then be argued that ARIN as inheritor of those assignments has no authority.
Since TCP/IP was invented by DoD under the auspices of DARPA at U.S. taxpayer expense then the People of the United States are the true owners of all IP space and all sales of IP addresses and all proceeds from those sales were conducted in their name and those monies belong to the United States. Furthermore, all users of TCP/IP and Ethernet owe licensing fees to the taxpayers for use of the patents and technologies developed in their name. Do you see a can of worms yet?
Net 44 is held in trust "for the community" and the community is the worldwide population of radio amateurs not just the current population of address holders. To say otherwise is to disenfranchise all radio amateurs worldwide.
This raises the question of how you would elect a board from the worldwide population and how you would validate and certify the election results. Would you elect a committee to oversee and certify an election of the board? It's turtles all the way down.
-
Bryan Fields -
Dave Gingrich -
Dave Wade -
Geoff Joy -KE6QH- -
J. William Semich -
Jim Popovitch -
John D. Hays -
K7VE - John -
Neil Johnson -
pete M -
Randy Neals -
William Waites