[arin-ppml] Draft Policy 2011-1 -Inter-RIRTransfers -Shepherd's Inquiry

Kevin Kargel kkargel at polartel.com
Thu Jun 23 13:30:20 EDT 2011


> -----Original Message-----
> From: Mike Burns [mailto:mike at nationwideinc.com]
> Sent: Thursday, June 23, 2011 12:13 PM
> To: Kevin Kargel; arin ppml
> Subject: Re: [arin-ppml] Draft Policy 2011-1 -Inter-RIRTransfers -
> Shepherd's Inquiry
> >
> > This falls back to the argument that illicit drug sales are going to
> > happen anyway and we can't stop them so we should legislate and tax
> them.
> > I personally don't buy that argument and I refuse to believe that we
> > should facilitate a bad practice just because it is inevitable.
> >
> > The majority of drivers break speed limit laws, yet I still feel speed
> > limit laws are good and necessary.  Even if rules don't completely
> > eradicate a problem the existence of the rules can ameliorate the
> problem.
> >
> Hi Kevin,
> Perhaps a return to Prohibition is in order, as it may ameliorate problems
> associated with alcohol consumption.
> Prohibition may indeed have reduced consumption, but its side effect was
> the
> growth of organized crime.

Here in the US we do still have a varied and confusing provisional prohibition in place.  There are many and sundry laws regarding alcohol sale, consumption, transportation, etc..  So yes, it appears the US government sees a valid reason for a limited prohibition.  Many public facilities including schools and publicly owned meeting places enforce either voluntary or mandated prohibition. Many municipalities and even counties still legislate complete prohibition within their borders.  Thank you for adding another point to my case.  

These laws do not eliminate alcohol related problems, but they do to some small extent control and regulate them.

> Our "needs-based prohibition" will have the side effect of corrupting
> Whois
> accuracy and driving transactions underground.
> We dropped Prohibition when we learned of its costly side effect, I hope
> we
> can drop the needs test before we have to learn about "Whois bypass" or a
> duel involving a private registry and ARIN over contested address space,
> or
> between ARIN and APNIC for that matter.

If "Whois bypass" or "private registry" issues arise, this falls in line with how the internet has evolved over the decades.  If people don't like the way something works they do something else.  If the something else works better then networks adopt it, if not the networks don't use it and it atrophy's.  So far this has been eminently functional.  

This is one of my personal soap boxes.  The internet has operated successfully so far only because of the philosophy of cooperative anarchy.

Isn't (wasn't?) internet2 at it's core little more than a private registry with Whois bypass?  This is gross simplification but I think it applies.


> Regards,
> Mike

More information about the ARIN-PPML mailing list