[ppml] Policy Proposal 2007-1 - Last Call

michael.dillon at bt.com michael.dillon at bt.com
Fri Apr 27 03:12:41 EDT 2007

> All valid objections, and ones that counsel noted, but one 
> must remember 
> that MAIL-FROM authentication means that today anyone can 
> send in an email 
> template with Owen's From: address and it'll be considered 
> "authentic". 

This is not true. ARIN's processes are not nearly so simplistic. The
policy doesn't mention the details because it doesn't need to, and
because policies are not process documents.

> I do urge the AC to reduce the number of steps in the chain 
> before moving 
> this proposal forward.  Five seems to be way too many; I'd be 
> happiest with 
> one, but I'd accept two or three.

I don't think that you have the expertise to make this judgement. Why is
two steps better than five? Why is the number of steps in the chain more
important than some other factor? Why shouldn't we accept *MORE* than 5
steps in some circumstances? Why should the policy concern itself with
technical details like "5 steps" rather than with policy details like
"alignment with PGP authentication best practices"?

--Michael Dillon

More information about the ARIN-PPML mailing list