[arin-ppml] Whois Integrity Policy Proposal

[Michael K. Smith - Adhost]

Hello Michael (et. al.):

> On 08/22/08 14:10, Michael K. Smith - Adhost wrote:
> > From http://www.arin.net/registration/legacy/ question 2's answer:
> >
> > "The first important benefit is the contractual promise to continue
> > receiving WHOIS and IN-ADDR services. ARIN currently provides those
> > services free to all legacy resource holders who maintain contact
> > with ARIN. This could change if the community so desired.
> > Correspondingly, we understand Legacy holders don’t want to receive
> > free services from the community, but are willing to pay their fair
> > share of the expenses."
> >
> > It seems to me that the bulk of responses from legacy holders to PPML
> > are not favorable to ARIN having any rights to the resources they
> > received pre-ARIN.  So, perhaps it's time to revisit "This could
> > change if the community so desired" in the paragraph above.  If ARIN
> > has no relationship at all with the legacy space, including providing
> > whois and in-addr.arpa services, then a lot of these discussions are
> > moot, no?
> 
> I have to admit that I am not totally following what you're saying, but
> my reading of the discussion is that issues of ARIN's jurisdiction over
> legacy IP address space can be separated from ARIN's providing WHOIS and
> in-addr.arpa services.  It appears that many of the legacy holders are
> willing to pay for services received from ARIN, but aren't (yet?) ready
> to settle the issue of jurisdiction.
> 
> It seems that we could advance the debate a bit by asking the questions:
> 
> o Does it make sense to separate the issues and allow legacy holders to
> pay for services like whois and in-addr.arpa via some sort of LRSA-lite?
> 
> o Will it help address the need for Whois integrity, since the LRSA-lite
> process could easily involve authentication and digital certs?
> 
> o Does it create issues for ARIN and/or the (regular) RSA-signatory
> community if legacy holders pay for ARIN services without addressing the
> issue of jurisdiction over legacy number resources?
> 
> thanks,
> michael

You came to a much more level-headed solution than I was implying.  :-)  I was thinking that we just cut ties entirely with the legacy holders, including WHOIS and in-addr.arpa service since there seems to be nothing but friction from both sides of the isle.

Regards,

Mike
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: PGP.sig
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 475 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <https://lists.arin.net/pipermail/arin-ppml/attachments/20080822/a4126d24/attachment.sig>