[arin-ppml] Policy Proposal 117: Required Resource Reviews

[michael.dillon at bt.com]

> 10. Except as provided below, resource reviews are conducted at the
> discretion of the ARIN staff.  In any of the circumstances mentioned
> below, a resource review must be initiated by ARIN staff:

> The credibility of a report shall be
> determined by ARIN staff. 

Does this b. section really need to be there? If so, then perhaps a
report should only be considered credible if at least one BOT member
considers it so. Or one BOT member or the CEO.

Otherwise, the two mentions of "staff" make it seem too recursive.

> c.Upon receipt by ARIN of five or more reports from separate
> individuals
> representing at least three separate organizations of fraud or abuse
> for
> the same organization or the same IP address block.

Here again, as in b. you are defining what is a credible report. Perhaps
you could just be explicit and say that a report is considered credible 
if at least one of the following is true: i) at least one BoT member
considers
it credible, ii) the ARIN CEO considers it credible, iii) five or more
separate individuals report substantially the same issue.

> e. An organization which submits a request for additional resources
> when
> more than 25% of their existing resources are obscured in SWIP or
> RWHOIS
> pursuant to section 4.2.3.7.6 (residential customer privacy).

Now that is a step too far. You are essentially discriminating against
a class of ISPs that serve the residential market and forcing them to
ALWAYS go through a review process that other ISPs are basically
exempt from.

Personally, I don't see the need for a policy that ORDERS staff to
do these reviews. I feel that it would be better to be done at the
discretion of the BOT who can also take into account resourcing issues
and other work that the staff could be doing. That's why we trust
the trustees to run the organization.

--Michael Dillon