[ppml] Nasty business with 2003-3

[Owen DeLong]

>> 2) The definition of 'street address' (IMO) is sufficiently ambiguous to
>> allow an ISP to not provide any localizing information.
>
> I believe that many telco and cableco ISPs view ARIN's policies
> as a form of regulation and would be as hesitant to violate the
> letter of an ARIN policy as they are hestiant to violate the law.
>
Michael, I'm not sure whether you intended sarcasm here or not, but, I can
assure you that in my experience, most Telco and Cableco iSPs are only
unwilling to violate the law if they expect to get caught and there is
significant accountability or cost to doing so.  Otherwise, they seem to
regard the letter of the law as a minor irritant at best.


> In fact, it is not too late for the BoT to convene an extraordinary
> meeting and do just that. We've got to realize when we are dealing
> with issues that affect the larger society and step aside from the
> political infighting between our industry interest groups.

I think this is an unfair characterization of the debate on this issue.

Owen



-- 
If this message was not signed with gpg key 0FE2AA3D, it's probably
a forgery.
-------------- 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/20040212/f567cae6/attachment.sig>