[arin-ppml] SWIPs & IPv6

[Milton L Mueller]

Owen
There is no law, regulation or constitutional provision that declares Internet addresses to be a "public commons resource." Indeed, your statements indicate that you may not have the clearest grasp of what you are saying theoretically (do you mean "public good" or "commons" and if you mean commons, do you mean "open access commons" or not?). FYI, IP addresses are both rival in consumption and excludable, which means that they fail both tests of a public good and need not be regulated as a commons. 

And even if they were, there is no logical, technical or operational linkage between the resource management regime and the alleged requirement to make all information about all users completely public for all purposes. 

To say that using IP addresses entails certain responsibilities is true. But we are debating what those responsibilities are or should be., You do not answer that question by begging it. 

Can we PLEASE attempt to discuss ways to solve the problems Danny MacPherson brought up? I can't even remember clearly what they were.  
________________________________________
From: arin-ppml-bounces at arin.net [arin-ppml-bounces at arin.net] On Behalf Of Owen DeLong [owen at delong.com]
Sent: Friday, December 04, 2009 9:46 PM
To: Ted Mittelstaedt
Cc: arin-ppml at arin.net
Subject: Re: [arin-ppml] SWIPs & IPv6

The claims that ISPs are forced to maintain contact information for
individuals is bunk
anyway.

1.      There is a residential privacy provision already in whois.

2.      Most individuals don't get blocks large enough to require SWIP.

Finally, if you need a large block and don't want to register as an
individual, getting
a legal fictitious name, or, creating a corporation is a relatively
simple thing to do.
That, combined with an address at a mail receiving service (such as
Mailboxes
etc. used to do before they became UPS) allows you to register without
need
to expose your residential address.

However, internet addresses are a public commons resource.  If you
want to be
granted the exclusive registration of a significant portion of said
public commons,
then, in exchange, you accept certain r
esponsibilities, one of which
is maintaining
a way to contact you about network-related issues that includes a
valid postal,
email, and telephone contact point.

This is a completely legitimate trade-off and I do not see a need to
change it.

The information should remain transparent and open.

Owen

_______________________________________________
PPML
You are receiving this message because you are subscribed to
the ARIN Public Policy Mailing List (ARIN-PPML at arin.net).
Unsubscribe or manage your mailing list subscription at:
http://lists.arin.net/mailman/listinfo/arin-ppml
Please contact info at arin.net if you experience any issues.