[arin-ppml] Petition for Discussion of ARIN-prop-134

[Benson Schliesser]

Hi, Bill.

On Apr 14, 2011, at 2:30 PM, William Herrin wrote:

>> ARIN-prop-134: Identification of Legitimate Address Holders
> ...
> Have you made a tally of support and dissent expressed by PPML posters
> during the discussion of prop 134? Were there any consistent themes
> supporting or opposing the proposal?

From my recollection, there were two issues raised regarding ARIN-prop-134.  If there are others that I've missed then I invite folks in the PPML community to speak up.

The first issue was doubt about whether this proposal is needed.  I believe that I answered this question adequately in the petition statement itself, which can be found quoted at http://lists.arin.net/pipermail/arin-ppml/2011-April/020604.html.

To reiterate, it is my view that the community needs an open standard with which to judge address rights ownership (in sync with the community and with ARIN).  The burgeoning IPv4 market makes this even more important today than it has historically been.

The second issue was whether or not this proposal accurately captures ARIN process.  Frankly, I was confused by this debate: some people argued that prop 134 was a mirror of what ARIN staff already did and was therefore unnecessarily redundant, while others claimed that prop 134 was different from current staff procedures and therefore questionable.

To be clear, my intent is to document the correct process.  Given that ARIN has expert experience in this domain, I would like to capture the ARIN process as a baseline and only update it if necessary to reflect legal and/or community standards.

Please let me know if you have questions or comments.  I hope that you choose to support the petition for ARIN-prop-134.

Cheers,
-Benson