[arin-ppml] LRSA concerns (Re: Policy Proposal: Whois Integrity Policy Proposal)

[William Herrin]

On Thu, Aug 21, 2008 at 4:22 PM, Paul Vixie <vixie at isc.org> wrote:
> community either decides to come after me or stop protecting me."  in other
> words, to want differential rights between legacy and RSA, i would have had
> to set my interests apart from the community's interests, while at the same
> time depending on the community to go on protecting my interests.  bad juju.

Paul,

Legacy resource holders don't rely on anything so amorphous as "The
Community" to protect their interests. They rely on finding one or two
companies in a competitive market willing to announce their route, on
the fact that they have a legal basis on which to use that route (the
addresses were formally assigned to them) and on the lack of any legal
basis for anyone other than them (especially ARIN) to challenge that
announcement.

At any rate, you asked what fix I would make to the LRSA to bring in
more legacy registrants and I gave you my best answers. Like 'em or
lump 'em.


On Thu, Aug 21, 2008 at 4:44 PM, Milton L Mueller <mueller at syr.edu> wrote:
> I don't see a meaningful distinction between "normalizing the
> relationship" and "governance," if "normalization" includes signing a
> legally binding contract that gives the signatory both entitlements (an
> authenticated claim on resource use) and obligations (e.g., to pay a
> fair share of ARIN costs).

Milton,

I'll defer to your definition and restate my comment:

Perhaps insisting that the LRSA include terms and conditions for which
there is not a strong consensus pushes the legacy registrants further
than they're willing to go.

I believe there is a strong consensus that it's in everyone's interest
for the legacy holders to normalize their relationship with ARIN at
least as much as they're willing to.

I believe there is a strong consensus that all active resources should
be authenticated in order to fight hijacking.

I believe there is a strong consensus that in order to receive whois
and rdns service, the legacy registrants should pay a fair share of
the whois and rdns operations cost.

Perhaps an LRSA would be more effective if it focused on those
consensus issues alone and left questions about ownership,
utilization, revocation, force majeure, et cetera for some other day.

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