[arin-ppml] SWIPs & IPv6

[Ted Mittelstaedt]

John Curran wrote:
> On Dec 1, 2009, at 11:33 AM, Ted Mittelstaedt wrote:
>> ... So, for LIRS that want to pee all over themselves, well then
>> don't file SWIPS.  In fact I ENCOURAGE IT STRONGLY because then all
>> I have to do is null-route your ENTIRE AS, I don't even have to
>> waste CPU cycles blocking just the obnoxious traffic from
>> Wonkulating.
> 
> Ted -
> 
> Under this philosophical approach, what would ARIN's responsibilities
> be with respect to an organization which files no SWIP's and runs no
> rwhois service?
>

My $0.02 is that the current obligations are nothing. (assuming the org
never again requests more numbering)

> More specifically, if an organization is willing to accept the
> incident/security response obligations implied by not showing
> sub-delegations, is that "acceptable" until/unless the organization
> needs to show utilization for an additional address block?   (If so,
> wouldn't it be best to update the NRPM to reflect this "optionality"
> of SWIPs/rwhois data?)
> 

Well, I come from the camp that would like to push ARIN to take a more
activist role.  Keep in mind that if all ARIN continues to do in the
future is hand out IPv6, that once the Internet shifts over to IPv6
that ARIN isn't really going to have very much work to do other than
maintaining the SWIPs, it's not like they won't have the time to do
this.  I frankly feel that the Internet is so critical
to so many things nowadays that having LESS centralized world regulation
over it is a Very Bad Thing.

My original post on this topic was aimed at the 'anti-whois' crowd 
because I felt that the post from Danny on the 30th was a recycling of
the old "well if nobody is filing SWIPS then I'm not going to so let's
get rid of them" argument. I have seen that logic before and I thought I
recognized it again, and I have to say that I believe my guess was
right considering Danny's highly negative reaction to my pointing
out the foolishness of not making SWIP data available.  I know that
the fundamental basis of the 'anti-whois' crowd is pure selfishness,
it's the "I got my customers and you ain't gonna get 'em" and the
ONLY argument that resonates with that primitive mindset is another
appeal to selfish-self interest.  Thus Danny's reaction when I pointed
out that NOT filing SWIPS or Rwhois, -AND- NOT taking the responsibility 
for the results of NOT filing SWIPS or Rwhois (ie: doing the extra work 
of handling complaints, etc.) is that your going to irritate the rest of 
us and we will eventually get sick of your crap and cut you off.

In the absence of global Internet leadership my feeling is that local 
country governments are going to move in to fill the void, and the 
Internet will move into a "Feudal" period where each country will 
enforce it's own laws on the part of the Internet that touches it's 
citizens.  I suspect if that were to happen (and I think it would)
you would have things like the Government of Saudi Arabia issuing arrest 
warrants for networking administrators of Verizon because some citizen
in SA was looking at nudie pictures on a Verizon server that are legal
in the US.  Things could get very very ugly if this happened.  Right now
most of the world's governments are in serious denial about how much
the Internet infrastructure affects their societies, and because of this
are not exerting their authority much, and most Internet administrators
seem to be under the impression things will stay this way.  History 
suggests otherwise, however - just look at regulation of the radio
frequency spectrum after the invention of radio, for example.

The suggestion of adjusting the NRPM to reflect this optionality is
a regressive "deregulation" move that I feel is moving in the opposite
direction than what should really be happening.  I'd rather see much
more activist regulation of SWIPs and rwhois on sub-delegations, as
I think that if the RIRs were very militant about enforcing the validity
of the data in the whois/rwhois system, that this would convince the
world's governments to refrain from issuing a bunch of contradictory
regulations.

Would you rather see each government require orgs to register SWIP
equivalents with their own registries?  Because that's probably what
will happen if the RIRs let the Whois/Rwhois system go to pot.

Ted



> /John
> 
> John Curran President and CEO ARIN
>