[ppml] Policy Proposal 2005-2: Directory Services Overhaul

[Jeff Williams]

Owen and all,

Owen dealing wrote:

> --On Monday, April 18, 2005 5:01 -0700 Jeff Williams
> <jwkckid1 at ix.netcom.com> wrote:
>
> > Owen and all,
> >
> >   I did NOT say ARIN had caused ANY harm.  I DID say that
> > harm has already occurred, AND that this proposed policy can
> > ONLY address one avenue by which harm can be caused.
> >
> Fair enough...
>
> >   So I believe it is you that did not understand what I said, Owen.
> > And perhaps in part that is my fault.  I hope now you and/or
> > anyone else is clear as to what, why and how this proposed
> > policy is insufficient IF harm is to be dealt with given lack
> > of policy directives as well as unchecked discretion by the
> > ARIN staff.  Else, the same result Jon caused will undoubtedly
> > reoccur all be it to a lessor degree and/or possibly over a longer
> > time frame...
> >
> You are right... This policy, and, every other ARIN policy does not
> cure all the worlds woes.  The best we can seek in any policy proposal
> is an incremental improvement over the current situation.  When deciding
> whether to support a policy or not, I tend to evaluate it on the basis
> of "Is this better than what we have now?"  If the answer to that question
> is a clear yes, as I believe it to be with this policy, then, I will
> support the policy.

  I did not suggest that this or any other proposed or existing policy
is a cure all for the worlds problems.  Hence your characterization
above is inconsistent with anything I have said..   It is true that
an incremental policy proposal such as 2005-2 is an minor improvement
in one particular area or method.  It also has as we have debated
and discussed, several flaws regarding discretion and use of same.
As such use is not defined even generally, discretion can be determined
on a case by case basis, which is fine unless there is pronounced
and identified actions that would direct otherwise.  Lacking such
language in this proposed policy, the potential for continued misuse
of a resource [ Ipv4 ] in this case, remains available and largely
not correctable given this policy proposal..

>
>
> Are there problems this policy doesn't address?  Sure.  Are there areas
> of this problem for which this policy is inadequate?  Sure.  Is there
> any area where this policy is worse than the current policy?  I don't
> believe so.  Is it better than what we have now?  Yes.
>
> Owen
>
>   ------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
>    Part 1.2       Type: application/pgp-signature
>               Encoding: 7bit

Regards,
--
Jeffrey A. Williams
Spokesman for INEGroup LLA. - (Over 134k members/stakeholders strong!)
"Be precise in the use of words and expect precision from others" -
    Pierre Abelard

"If the probability be called P; the injury, L; and the burden, B;
liability depends upon whether B is less than L multiplied by
P: i.e., whether B is less than PL."
United States v. Carroll Towing  (159 F.2d 169 [2d Cir. 1947]
===============================================================
Updated 1/26/04
CSO/DIR. Internet Network Eng. SR. Eng. Network data security
IDNS. div. of Information Network Eng.  INEG. INC.
E-Mail jwkckid1 at ix.netcom.com
 Registered Email addr with the USPS
Contact Number: 214-244-4827