[arin-ppml] Draft Policy 2010-3: Customer Confidentiality

[William Herrin]

On Tue, Feb 2, 2010 at 8:53 PM, Leo Bicknell <bicknell at ufp.org> wrote:
> In a message written on Tue, Feb 02, 2010 at 04:55:49PM -0700, Chris Grundemann wrote:
>> Correct, I believe that whois data should be both complete and
>> accurate; 2008-7 addresses the latter, here we discuss the former.
>
> For the record, I agree that whatever information the rules say should
> be in whois needs to be accurate and up to date.  I support efforts to
> make it so.
>
> I will also note, one of the issues raised by staff is that with the
> current level of information there are man-years of work to verify it
> all.

I don't particularly want to pay ARIN to audit me and require me to
spend more money proving the legitimacy of my IP address consumption.
I'm just cheap that way.

Our system is far more cost-effective and a lot less of a hassle if
ARIN instead presumes truthfulness on the part of its registrants and
reacts to complaints from the self-appointed community watchdogs who
invariably manage to notice and bust the folks doing wrong. Thing is,
community watchdogs can't catch bad guys from a void: they have to
have data that can be verified or refuted.

Perhaps a *fair* solution is that ISPs who would rather suffer
penetrating annual audits purchased by ARIN at the ISP's expense can
forgo publishing customer information via SWIP while those who place
their information in the public's hands remain relieved of that
burden.

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