[ppml] Policy Proposal -- Limit Scope of Anonymous Allocations

[Owen DeLong]

I agree that it is not necessary to know the identity of individuals
using individual IP addresses or their physical location.  However, we're
not talking about that with 2003-3 or my proposal.  We're talking about
blocks of IP addresses, and, unless that organization also agrees to be
legally liable for damages inflicted from those addresses, then the
stewardship role is meaningless from a legal perspective.  As such,
additional granularity is necessary in the database for block allocations.

Owen


--On Thursday, November 20, 2003 11:17 AM +0000 Michael.Dillon at radianz.com 
wrote:

>> While I agree that the provider type 1 case would be nice to solve, I
> think
>> it would be hard to do that.  I'm open to suggestions on how we could do
>> so and I would support a reasonable policy in such case.
>
> It's not up to ARIN to solve any of these cases. Therefore, there is
> no such thing as a reasonable policy in this context.
>
> The world does not need to know the identity of individuals using
> IP addresses and it does not need to know the physical location
> of individuals using IP addresses. All the world needs to know is
> which organization fulfills the stewardship role for any given
> range of IP addresses. If there are any abuse issues with a
> certain IP address, it is both necessary and suficient for ARIN's
> database to identify the organization to which they have delegated
> the stewardship role.
>
>
> --Michael Dillon
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>



-- 
If it wasn't crypto-signed, it probably didn't come from me.
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 186 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <https://lists.arin.net/pipermail/arin-ppml/attachments/20031120/e0c1e309/attachment.sig>