[arin-ppml] Policy Proposal: Whois Integrity Policy Proposal

[Paul Lustgraaf]

I second these sentiments and also oppose the proposal.

Paul Lustgraaf

> I find in these two sentences an implicit assumption that resource holders
> cannot authenticate themselves sufficiently for whois updating purposes
> without being under an RSA.  I find this assumption faulty.  Since there are
> arguably many reliable mechanisms for authenticating a resource holder (thus
> satisfying the stated motivation of the proposal), it would either be
> ignorant or disingenuous to assert that it can only be done via an RSA.  In
> fact, I fail to see how an RSA, in and of itself, would even satisfy the
> stated motivation at all.
> 
> Secondly, unless I'm unaware of another affected group, I believe the only
> resource holders that are not already under an RSA (and therefore affected
> by this language) are exclusively the set of non-RSA legacy holders.
> 
> Therefore, the only possible result of this language that I can currently
> fathom would be, in effect, the forcible conversion of non-RSA legacy
> holders into RSA participants, under the misguided assertion of increased
> whois update confidence.  Consequently, I'm afraid that I must conclude this
> proposal is either fundamentally flawed at best, or a strong-arm sales
> tactic at worst.
> 
> I therefore oppose this language and recommend the same to others.
> 
> I invite corrections of any misunderstandings under which I might be
> speaking.
> 
> Best regards,
> E. Westbrook

Paul Lustgraaf                   "Change is inevitable.  Progress is not."
Network Engineer
Iowa State University Information Technology Services    grpjl at iastate.edu
Ames, IA  50011                                               515-294-0324