[arin-ppml] ARIN-prop-136 Services Opt-out Allowed for Unaffiliated Address Blocks
jcurran at arin.net
Fri Feb 25 04:37:11 EST 2011
On Feb 25, 2011, at 5:00 PM, Benson Schliesser wrote:
>>> I have no argument opposing that ARIN is obligated to perform according to its own bylaws and agreements (with ICANN, RSA holders, etc). My statement is that ARIN lacks authority to exert regulation over unaffiliated organizations, such as legacy holders that haven't signed a LRSA. If such an organization decides to transfer addresses without consulting ARIN, and ARIN enforces policy over that organization as a result of their actions, then ARIN has exerted authority. Where does such authority come from?
>> ARIN has full authority to manage entries in the
>> ARIN Whois database.
> And no responsibility for the impact?
> This facile answer is tiring - I've heard it many times, and it is a word game. Actions have consequences, and enforcing policy over the "ARIN Whois" will effect the community. Specifically, the manner in which ARIN manages the Whois database may lead to different routing behavior, with a number of possible business and legal ramifications. Word games don't change that fact.
ARIN accepts responsibility for its actions, including
management of entries in the ARIN Whois database. You
have implied otherwise several times, and I've informed
you that we do not see any issue. Regardless of the
number of times that you ask the question, the answer
does not change.
>> Please ask your question in the context of your policy proposal
>> 136 so that I may address the question. As it is, I am unable
>> to determine if you are suggesting that alternative registries
>> would be an "implementation detail of that management structure"
>> within the ARIN region.
> In the context of proposal 136, as well as 133 and 134, you have suggested the need for a global policy discussion. My question is a result of your suggestion. Why specifically, in the context of global policy, is this not a matter for ARIN to decide? As I outlined in my quoted text above, I don't think ICP-2 limits ARIN's ability to decide this issue. But this is an honest question - if I'm overlooking something I'd like to know.
My apologies for being unclear - In the policy proposal, you reference
hypothetical "replacement directory services". If these entities are
allowed under ARIN's local policy framework, then ICP-2 states that
ARIN's policies would need to apply in a fair and equitable manner
these entities just as they apply to ISP's in the region. Does that
actually meet your requirements? I expected otherwise from the policy
President and CEO
More information about the ARIN-PPML