[arin-ppml] Fwd: [arin-announce] LRSA Requirement Modified for 8.3 Transfers
cgrundemann at gmail.com
Thu Apr 21 10:54:37 EDT 2011
On Wed, Apr 20, 2011 at 22:13, David Conrad <drc at virtualized.org> wrote:
> I would be happy to work with you on revising ARIN-prop-134.
> I'm surprised having clearly defined and well documented community consensus
> definitions would be controversial. Clearly documenting the consensus view
> as to what a 'legitimate address holder' is would seem to be a really good
> idea as we move into a world in which the probability people will contest
> address holdership approaches 1. However, I'm sure I'm missing something
> (having been out of this particular world for so long)...
As others have stated there are two considerations here:
1) Does this belong in policy?
The response to prop-134 here on arin-ppml included questions along
the lines of "what problem does this policy solve?" If you believe
that there is a clear benefit to having this current operational
detail codified in policy, then the second consideration should be
2) What is the community consensus view of a legitimate address holder?
I would strongly suggest that any new attempt at defining this in
policy start with a poll of the community at large (as opposed to
starting with a preconceived definition). IMHO, the best approach
would be to find/build consensus around the definition of 'legitimate
address holder' and only once that is done (rough consensus counts),
write a policy proposal to codify it. A good place to start is
probably with current ARIN staff practice, since that has served us
very well thus far (I can't name an incident caused by it, perhaps
others know of problems I am unaware of).
> You are receiving this message because you are subscribed to
> the ARIN Public Policy Mailing List (ARIN-PPML at arin.net).
> Unsubscribe or manage your mailing list subscription at:
> Please contact info at arin.net if you experience any issues.
More information about the ARIN-PPML