[arin-ppml] Policy Proposal: Customer Confidentiality
kkargel at polartel.com
Tue Jun 9 15:59:14 EDT 2009
Top post -- sorry
Now that we can "own" and "sell" IP's might it not be a better idea to only
require granularity of PoC down to the IP owner and at the same time hold
the owner responsible for the traffic?
> -----Original Message-----
> From: arin-ppml-bounces at arin.net [mailto:arin-ppml-bounces at arin.net] On
> Behalf Of Brian Johnson
> Sent: Tuesday, June 09, 2009 2:21 PM
> To: arin-ppml at arin.net
> Subject: Re: [arin-ppml] Policy Proposal: Customer Confidentiality
> Jay Hennigan wrote:
> > Brian Johnson wrote:
> > > I support this proposal... with one question?
> > >
> > > Wouldn't this be, in practice, the same as a customer "opt-out" of
> > > SWIP/RWHOIS? Not that I have even the slightest problem with this.
> > I support this proposal as written.
> > I view it more as a customer "opt-in" to SWIP/RWHOIS which is IMNSHO
> > far
> > preferable to "opt-out".
> > "Opt-out" = "We will spam you back to the stone age until you beg us
> > stop, and we will sell your identity to others who will do likewise."
> > "Opt-in" = "We won't annoy you or disclose your identity unless we
> > your specific (and revokable) permission to do so."
> I just view the current environment as a disclose first and so would
> view a change in this as an opt-out policy.
> No response needed as I know this is just semantics anyhow.
> - Brian.
> 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:
> Please contact info at arin.net if you experience any issues.
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Size: 3224 bytes
Desc: not available
More information about the ARIN-PPML