[arin-ppml] ARIN-prop-136 Services Opt-out Allowed for Unaffiliated Address Blocks

[Owen DeLong]

On Feb 24, 2011, at 3:41 PM, John Curran wrote:

> On Feb 25, 2011, at 7:16 AM, Milton L Mueller wrote:
> 
>> False assumption #1: opting out of ARIN services means no Whois record. 
>> Fact: Some people are so stuck in the mindset that ARIN and only ARIN can offer a Whois service that they are missing the point of this proposal. Are you aware of the request by a prospective competitor for bulk access to Whois so that it can be reconciled with an alternate provider and maintain a globally consistent directory? 
> 
> Milton - 
> 
> We don't seem to have any actual details regarding how such registries 
> might interact with the existing system, what common goals would still 
> exist (if any), or even what authority and policies they'd operate under. 
> Such details are essential to understanding what exactly is being proposed 
> when you reference "alternative providers", and as you are well-aware, 
> these are the sort of issues that took years to work out in the DNS 
> registry system and (to some extent) even now are still evolving under 
> guidance from an entire ecosystem of constituencies within ICANN. 
> 
FWIW I choose not to participate in the domain policy process, not because
I think it is fine as is, but, because I think it is a quagmire that is broken beyond
all possibility of useful repair. I have given up on domain policy as a useless
waste. The facilitation of squatters, domain tasting, and the exorbitant
profiteering by organizations glomming onto any name they can think of
and holding them hostage until they get a sufficient ransom is completely
contrary to the public interest and the goals of good internet governance.

The mistake of affiliating domain names with trademarks has only further
clouded the issue of domain policy.

I suspect that Milton views most of these things as a feature, rather than
a bug. As such, I suspect he wants to encumber the IP addressing
process with a similar construct.

Personally, I think we have a system that works well and is serving the
community. The policy process is open to any willing participant (which
as near as I can tell is significantly less true of the domain policy process).
> 
> I presume that you are familiar with this sort of process, and hopefully
> can see how the ARIN region considering it independently from the current 
> global policy for number resource management would be contrary to actually 
> having open and transparent governance for these the global number resources?
> 
+1

Owen