[ppml] Posting of Legacy RSA and FAQ

[David S. Madole]

> From Ted Mittelstaedt [tedm at ipinc.net]
>
>>Those six words you edited out change the meaning quite a bit. It's a
>>usual goal in (honest) editing and quoting not to change the meaning of
>>things.
>>
>
> No, sorry they don't change the meaning.

Then why did you feel the need to remove them?


> Your talking like ARIN is an entity separate from the community.  It
> isn't.
> ARIN will do what the community wants.

ARIN is in fact a separate entity from the community. ARIN is a
corporation that was formed through a defined legal process and has
contractual rights and obligations. It is a legal entity. It has a
mechanism to define a single organizational position on any issue.

The community is just a group of people interested in IP address policy.
There is no organization except perhaps between members of ARIN and
non-members (both of which are still the community). The community has no
way to draw a consensus among itself and agree to a single position on any
issue. Therefore, it is silly to say that ARIN will do what the community
wants, since it's impossible to define exactly what the community wants.

That's like saying the Congress of the United States will do what the
citizens want. Go around and ask a bunch of citizens whether they think
Congress is "doing what they want".

ARIN may solicit input from the community and they may base their actions
on that input, but I would not generalize that to say that "ARIN will do
what the community wants". It's not that simple. Among other reasons, ARIN
has obligations that the community does not have.


> Why do YOU want multiple RSA's offered to Legacy holders?  What do YOU
> get out of it, why do YOU want this to happen?  Do you think it would be a
> good thing to have 4, 5, 6, 10, 15, 150, 500 different RSA's out there,
> each tailored to some complainer?

I never suggested I wanted multiple RSA's. Just because I may not like the
one that has been put forth doesn't mean that I want multiple ones, it may
just mean I want one different one. Maybe I missed something, I have not
been on this list that long, but I never saw a draft of this RSA before it
was released, so all I can do is comment on it now. I admit that may be my
own fault.

By the way, did you ever notice what the very first words of the RSA
document say?

   "Legacy RSA Version 1.0"

What's the point of that if it's a foregone conclusion that there will
never be another one? Someone needs to clue in the person that composed
this that the version number is an unnecessary consideration.

David