[arin-ppml] ARIN-prop-134: Identification of Legitimate Address Holders
On Feb 16, 2011, at 7:40 PM, William Herrin wrote:
>> Prop 134 makes the definition of "Legitimate Address Holder"
>> a matter of community consensus rather than a staff implementation.
> A. The community doesn't actually have a consensus on this.
> B. If we did have a consensus, it wouldn't be prop 134.
If there isn't consensus on this topic, then what does ARIN implement? My understanding is that ARIN staff currently implements something similar to prop 134. If there are differences, I'm hoping to understand and discuss them.
> C. Historically speaking, the kinds of documentation you're looking
> for often isn't there.
This is a challenge, I suppose. I believe that I may need to update the text, based on a comment John Curran made, to reflect the validity of historical whois updates. But we should talk about the implications, in as much as it is possible for ARIN to make a mistake. E.g. Theoretically, if multiple years ago I told ARIN that your block was mine and ARIN accepted that update, could you present yourself now and successfully dispute that change? What policy would you rely upon?
> D. Policy for policy's sake is unhelpful. It merely solidifies
> bureaucracy and ties folks hands when the odd exceptional case comes
> along. ARIN today does a fine job sorting out who is the rightful
> address holder when an update is requested but the POCs are defunct.
> Let 'em be.
I'm sure that is often the case. But I have heard a number of accounts that contradict your statement. Granted, these accounts mostly have to do with application of policy to legacy resources, when the organizations involved didn't expect to be subject to that policy. For example, I don't believe ARIN will update the whois to reflect a transfer of legacy resources to a party that refuses to submit to "justification of need" policy. We can debate whether the recipient is obliged to submit, but that would miss the point. The point is that if ARIN refuses to update whois in any circumstances, then we run the risk of inaccurate data - the more likely those circumstances are, the less accurate the whois will become. And I'd argue that IPv4 exhaustion makes some circumstances (such as the sale of legacy address blocks) even more likely.