[arin-ppml] (no subject)

[Steve Bertrand]

tvest at eyeconomics.com wrote:
> Hi Warren,
> 
> Other, perhaps more practical ways of looking at it:
> 
> The default public/open availability of comprehensive whois information
> for the institutions controlling number resources represents a kind of
> distributed mechanism for whois data error detection and correction.
> Assuming that the practical needs that justify the creation and
> maintenance of a comprehensive registration/whois service also justify
> the maintenance of *accurate* (and complete, and timely)
> registration/whois information, and consequently that the only
> alternative to satisfying that need via a distributed feedback mechanism
> is a mechanism that delivers/preserves the same accuracy levels through
> purely internal (RIR staff administered) efforts, then the arrangement
> with many eyes contributing is likely to be much more cost effective,
> i.e., to provide the same benefits at a much lower cost to ARIN members.
> 
> One might also consider the merits of this "distributed management"
> approach to maintaining whois as a useful mechanism for preserving the
> openness and transparency of ARIN policy outcomes. The more that such
> (by current convention, "public") contact information remains publicly
> accessible, the less ARIN members have to rely on ARIN staff to produce
> summary answers to sensitive policy questions using
> non-sharable/non-disclosable member data. In a world where virtually
> every important institution is at the center of a permanent debate
> between defenders of "x is generally good" and partisans of "x is
> hopelessly corrupt"  -- with the vast majority of stakeholders likely to
> be in the "trust but verify" center -- seems like it would be prudent to
> weigh the costs and benefits very carefully before eliminating the
> public data resources that make such independent analysis/verification
> efforts possible.

... ^ what he said.

Steve