Thank you - you've very articulately summarized the situation that ARIN faces at present in performing number resource reviews.
ARIN will exercise any degree of review & investigation that the community specifies in policy, but absent such we must be conservative in our actions in changing resource entries less we endorse incorrect data, harm innocent parties, and create undue risk for the organization and the very resources we administer.
President and CEO
On Nov 6, 2010, at 2:04 PM, Jack Bates wrote:
> I think it comes down to 2 aspects for ARIN.
> 1) policy. There must be a clear and precise policy dictating what resources and processes ARIN should use. Honestly, ARIN should have things written out clear enough that it falls in the same spectrum of ISO 9001 (though I'm not sure they actually have a product, so an actual certification would seem silly, but they should have the processes documented to that level).
> 2) interpretation. Policy often isn't precise and this has left ARIN dealing with interpretation. They must balance the manpower they can afford with the tasks set in policy for them to do. Most of their policies have wiggle room, and they will make their own determinations within that wiggle room based on historical practice and manpower.
> What John is asking is that a policy be drawn up to give the appropriate direction, that policy be discussed and modified appropriately by the community, and then ratified so it can be used until such time that a new policy overrides or changes it. The process to do this is also a policy.
> 1) is something we as the community do.
> 2) is failure of the community in it's performance of 1, and often times can lead to serious disagreements between community and ARIN. It is subject to change, though it is a drawn out process and ARIN is loathe to change their interpretations as it effects the community as a whole (and those who were subject to the first interpretation unknowingly become subject to the new interpretation). Generally, interpretations widen in scope and do not contract. This prohibits being lenient with part of the community and then being stricter with the rest of the community. This is why most interpretations are extremely conservative and can often be more restrictive than the community desired.