[arin-ppml] Analogies

[William Herrin]

On Mon, May 2, 2011 at 7:13 PM, John Curran <jcurran at arin.net> wrote:
> On May 3, 2011, at 12:47 AM, William Herrin wrote:
>> Section 7. Current and future policies. Compliance with tomorrow's
>> NRPM is immaterial to the provision of whois and dns services.
>
> Incorrect.  You may be the registrant and have the use of the
> resource in accordance with policies, but other parties have
> some rights with respect the same registration records.  For
> example, if the community adopts a policy which adds a new type
> of contact for resource records, then you are going to get one.
> Similarly if the community changes the policies regarding the
> visibility of various fields contained within the registry.
> While there is contractual protection against policy changes
> which inhibit your use of the resource, the general case is
> policy changes to the registry apply, and the registry services
> are DNS and Whois.

Hypothetical future community-adopted policy:

"Any network found to host photoshopped pornography of Republican
political candidates is subject to having its number resources
revoked."

Which part of the LRSA prevents this hypothetical policy from applying
to its registrant? Which part shields him from involuntary reclamation
of their addresses under LRSA 7 and 14b2?

Don't like that one? Let's try another:

"Recognizing the IPv4 address shortage, all registrants shall renumber
out of and return IP addresses used for all non-public networks such
as corporate lans, replacing those networks with RFC1918 space and
NATs instead."

LRSA 10b doesn't apply -- the addresses for which return is compelled
are actually in use.

Section 7's scope vastly exceeds any reasonable application to the
provision of whois and rdns services.

Regards,
Bill Herrin



-- 
William D. Herrin ................ herrin at dirtside.com  bill at herrin.us
3005 Crane Dr. ...................... Web: <http://bill.herrin.us/>
Falls Church, VA 22042-3004