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

[William Herrin]

On Wed, Aug 20, 2008 at 1:26 PM, Howard, W. Lee
<Lee.Howard at stanleyassociates.com> wrote:
> Bill Herrin carved the following in cuneiform on clay tablets:
>> What teeth bite ARIN if they
>> don't uphold theirs? What's ARIN's penalty for trying to
>> skirt the edge of what the contract allows?
>
> Can you provide some examples of what an evil ARIN could do
> that isn't covered in the LRSA?

Howard,

An "evil" ARIN eh? Hmm, let's see...

4.d.ii. You host a whistleblower site on the IP addresses through
which classified information is leaked. Having broken the law in a
manner associated with the IP addresses, an evil ARIN is permitted to
cancel your registration, at which point the IP addresses revert to
ARIN's control.

6.b. An evil ARIN could reinterpret 6b. Means 1 or 2, not 1 and 2.
Since it's 2013 and all end-user maintenance fees have increased to
$50k/year (the money redistributed to help the poor backbones cope
with the IPv4 route explosion in the wake of IPv6's failure) that
includes the legacy maintenance fee. Now the onus is on the registrant
to successfully bring action under 14.c, which requires him to attend
15.l. arbitration in Washington DC. And then having gone to that time
and expense, he has to actually convince the arbitrator that 6b really
does require ARIN to meet BOTH criteria 1 and 2.

14.a. An evil ARIN could simply give 30 days' notice to the legacy
registrant that they are terminating the LRSA agreement at the end of
the current annual period. No cause; they're simply not offering
renewal. The termination was not per 14.c, so per 14.e. the address
revert to ARIN.

Want another? I can keep going for a while.


> My experience is such that
> I trust ARIN more than some people, so I have a paucity of
> imagination.

The courts are full of good, trustworthy people suing each other over
broken promises. Stuff happens. Priorities change. Even with the best
intentions, perceptions of "fair" drift apart.

A good system is resilient in the face of that drift.


> Extra points if you suggest terms of enforcement.

Have termination for any cause other than non-communication,
non-payment or unlawful action specifically against ARIN to cause
control of the addresses to revert to the current status quo, similar
to the results of having successfully completed 14.c.

Also, 14c and 14f are in conflict. The number resources can't resume
the status they had prior to the legacy agreement if questionable
sections (like 9) survive the contract's termination. In an ordinary
contract of adhesion like this, the ambiguity would be resolved
against the drafter (ARIN). The LRSA specifically excludes that in
15i.


On Wed, Aug 20, 2008 at 2:13 PM, Paul Vixie <vixie at isc.org> wrote:
> you're acting like i was the only one who signed it on advice of dayjob
> counsel.  there hasn't been a stampede, i'll grant that, but other than a
> few folks on PPML some of whom misunderstood the terms and changed their
> minds after they learned the details, there hasn't been a revolt, either.

Paul,

No, there hasn't been a stampede. Nor a revolt. I think that's because
many (perhaps most) of the legacy registrants think that the LRSA was
a strong step in the right direction. Now take the next step and the
one after that, and you may actually see the stampede. Which, IMO,
would be a good thing.

Regards,
Bill Herrin



-- 
William D. Herrin ................ herrin at dirtside.com  bill at herrin.us
3005 Crane Dr. ...................... Web: <http://bill.herrin.us/>
Falls Church, VA 22042-3004