[arin-ppml] Petition Underway - Policy Proposal 95: CustomerConfidentiality - Time Sensitive

[michael.dillon at bt.com]

> In regards to Prop 95, it is my opinion that protecting the 
> service provider from the possibility of customer 'theft' is 
> insufficient grounds for obfuscating contact information for 
> re-assigned IP networks.

I agree with you but would like to note that you are only
addressing the rationale of 2010-3, not the actual policy
text itself.

In spite of the fact that I agree with you, I still believe
that the 2010-3 is a good change and should be implemented
with a bit of wordsmithing such as removing the last sentence
since ARIN hostmasters already sign NDAs which prohibit
disclosing information. If I remember correctly, they are
also prohibited from disclosing such info to the Board of
Trustees, the Advisory Council, and all other ARIN staff
including the supervisor of Registration Services who is
their boss.

> What's becoming clear as I have read this thread and last 
> years original thread on the original prop 95 is that there 
> is a third class of networks smaller than a /24 that should 
> perhaps be considered.

And a 4th class where Joe Bloe, in his bedroom in the rooming
house (or frat house) gets a full /48 assignment, just like
the 200 acre, 27 building Ford factory across town.

> Trivial re-assignments, smaller than the bottom of the 
> 'small' range, do not require specific listing and are 
> covered under the general listing for the ISP as the point of 
> contact and responsible party for the larger aggregate 
> network and implied transit provider.

Sounds like all IPv6 assignments /48 or less, would not
go into whois, which is not much different from saying
that only organizations under contract with ARIN go into
whois.

I know people are focusing on the IPv4 policy, but it
would be really, really nice to have one policy covering
all resources, even including ASNs. I think that this
is possible and I think that if the text presented to
the meeting covers this possibility, it would open up
people's thinking enough to break the logjam on whois
policy.

--Michael Dillon