[ppml] Policy Proposal 2007-15: Authentication ofLegacyResources - version 1.1
Andrew Dul
andrew.dul at quark.net
Sat Sep 1 12:32:46 EDT 2007
- Previous message: [ppml] Legacy /24s
- Next message: [ppml] FW: Legacy /24s
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
At 05:47 PM 8/31/2007 -0400, Keith W. Hare wrote: > > >> -----Original Message----- >> From: ppml-bounces at arin.net [mailto:ppml-bounces at arin.net] On >> Behalf Of Scott Leibrand >> Sent: Friday, August 31, 2007 4:54 PM >> To: David Conrad >> Cc: Public Policy Mailing List >> Subject: Re: [ppml] Policy Proposal 2007-15: Authentication >> of Legacy Resources - version 1.1 >> >> David Conrad wrote: >> > On Aug 31, 2007, at 10:20 AM, Member Services wrote: >> > >> >> 1. Policy Proposal Name: Authentication of Legacy Resources >> >> No changes shall be made to legacy resource records which are not >> >> covered by a registration services agreement after >> December 31, 2007. >> >> >> > >> > I suspect that refusal to update registration information >> will likely >> > not be very popular with folks trying to fight spam, >> phishing, fraud, >> > etc. It could also have the effect of spurring the >> establishment of >> > alternative registries that maintain "accurate" information. >> >> Is requiring registrants to sign a contract that codifies >> their rights >> and responsibilities "refusal"? I don't see the requirements >> here as at >> all onerous, and wouldn't see alternate registries as viable. As an >> ISP, if a customer asked me to route space based on the >> information in >> some alternate registry because they were unwilling to sign >> an RSA and >> pay ARIN $100/year, I would consider that suspicious enough to have >> another abuse scrub run on the customer, and refuse to route >> the space. > >By the time the RSA for legacy resource holders is available, and ARIN >starts an outreach to legacy resoure holders, it is going to be >December, 2007. > >How about saying "No changes shall be made to legacy resource records >which are not covered by a registration services agreement after >December 31, 2008." If the date of implementation is a stumbling block, then it certainly can be changed to accomodate the consensus of the community. Andrew
- Previous message: [ppml] Legacy /24s
- Next message: [ppml] FW: Legacy /24s
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
More information about the PPML mailing list