salo at msc.edu
Thu Jun 20 19:38:06 UTC 1996
> To: Peter Lothberg <roll at stupi.se>
> Cc: "nanog" <nanog at merit.edu>
> Subject: Sprint NAP
> From: Daniel Karrenberg <Daniel.Karrenberg at ripe.net>
> Date: Mon, 17 Jun 1996 10:04:26 +0200
> > Peter Lothberg <roll at stupi.se> writes:
> > SPRINT NETWORK ACCESS POINT (NAP)
> > TERMS AND CONDITIONS
> > ....
> > 6. IP Address Assignment
> > The customer shall receive his IP address assignment(s) from Sprint. Any
> > address(es) provided by Sprint shall remain the property of Sprint ...
> Address ownership .... what a concept.
> Although this is doing the right thing, the wording is dubious.
Actually, I believe that the addresses in question are _host_ addresses,
(for devices directly attached to the Sprint NAP). I don't quite know
what someone would do with a Sprint NAP host address if they "kept"
You are correct that the language seems rather emphatic to networking
types, but it probably works well for the lawyers.
More information about the NANOG