US CODE: Title 15, Chapter 1, Section 2.
> ARIN, by virtue of its granting authority, could, if it chose to do so,
> impose a condition upon all grantees that they avoid arbitrary or
> capricious treatment of other grantees.
And how would one define arbitrary or capricious? Some would say that not
accepting /20s is neither, but rather is saving one's own routers.
> This is one of those situations which reflect the fact that "regulation of
> ARIN" by its membership is really not regulation. Since the membership
> (and BoT and AC) are, in practice, going to be the existing ISPs, the
> policies of ARIN will be essentially those desired by the existing ISPs,
> not necessarily what is best for the public (the same public that will be
> granting the tax exemptions.)
I am not aware of membership being limited to ISPs. The text I see says
"Open to any entity or individual wishing to participate in IP-related
> This is not something which has an easy answer, but we should seriously
> consider whether ARIN ought to try some mild measures to rein-in the "wild
> west" attitude of every ISP for itself.
Concrete suggestions solicited.