[ppml] Policy Proposal: Resource Review Process
Dean Anderson
dean at av8.com
Thu Jul 19 12:53:33 EDT 2007
- Previous message: [ppml] Policy Proposal: Resource Review Process
- Next message: [ppml] Policy Proposal: Resource Review Process
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
On Wed, 18 Jul 2007 michael.dillon at bt.com wrote: > > Since ARIN has no legal power to force a legacy-only holder to > > provide justification, any response on their part would be > > completely voluntary. > > I have no legal power to force you to reply to my messages, yet time > and time again, you do reply. There is a difference, though, between voluntary replies, and coerced replies. > I think this whole "legal power" thing is a red herring. I think this whole 'resource review' is a red herring. 2. ARIN may conduct such reviews: a. when any new resource is requested, b. whenever ARIN has cause to believe that the resources had originally been obtained fraudulently, or c. at any other time without cause unless a prior review has been completed in the preceding 12 months. I have no problem with a. or b. above. But option c. is just begging for trouble "without cause". It gives an unlimited power to review the private customer data of a recipient "without cause" once a year. ARIN shouldn't be doing anything without cause and justification. One wonders why that would ever be good policy in any circumstance. The potential for abuse is tremendous. The total legacy allocations do not amount to much. The amount of _unused_ legacy allocations do not amount to a drip in the bucket. The underlying premise that resources are not being reclaimed is a red herring. (It was asserted against Kremen, though) There are some _bad_ reasons that Vixie cronies want this. There is no legitimate reason to be harrassing IP recipients or persons like Kremen or Av8 Internet or anyone "without cause"; the only political cause is the Paul Vixie/SORBS harrassment of Av8 Internet and of persons like Kremen. That harrassment isn't in the public interest. The harrassment is nothing but revenge for having exposed their schemes and dishonest activities. Policies should be scrutinized closely for their potential to be abused for ulterior purposes that aren't in the public interest. Anytime I see things "without cause", I wonder why that unlimited power would be needed. Unlimited powers need to be reviewed carefully, and need to be very well justified as being absolutely necessary. In this case, there isn't even a hint of necessity for such a power. --Dean -- Av8 Internet Prepared to pay a premium for better service? www.av8.net faster, more reliable, better service 617 344 9000
- Previous message: [ppml] Policy Proposal: Resource Review Process
- Next message: [ppml] Policy Proposal: Resource Review Process
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
More information about the PPML mailing list