[arin-ppml] Analogies

[Owen DeLong]

On May 2, 2011, at 5:46 PM, Jimmy Hess wrote:

> On Mon, May 2, 2011 at 6:43 PM, William Herrin <bill at herrin.us> wrote:
>> 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:
> 
>> "Any network found to host photoshopped pornography of Republican
>> political candidates is subject to having its number resources
>> revoked."
> 
> ARIN probably needs to surrender the ability to revoke IP addresses
> based on censorship grounds back to the community, by putting a clause
> in the RSA restricting ARIN from revoking resources for that reason,
> if it even has
> maintained such an ability, so a policy cannot ever revoke resources
> for the purpose of targetting  content  served by hosts using an IP address.
> 
ARIN has never maintained such an ability and policy does not support any
creation of such an ability, at least in my interpretation of the current policy.

If the community somehow came to consensus in favor of such a policy,
the AC and the Board would still have to judge it to be technically sound
good policy. I think that is very unlikely.

> ARIN is concerned with stewardship of resources, and management
> of what content or traffic can be exchanged by hosts assigned those resources,
> is, and should be out of the scope of IP addressing and DNS policy.
> 
Agreed.

> That type of policy simply should not be allowed, even if the community finds
> certain activity hosts using IP or DNS resources can perform to be abhorrent.
> 
Let's be somewhat careful here. Are you saying that we should protect the
rights of snowshoe spammers to obtain vast quantities of resources, for
example?

> 
> Any censorship can be determined by the network service providers exchanging
> the data, and by the relevant jurisdictions the hosts reside in;
> there is no need
> for ARIN to intervene there.
> 
Mostly I agree.

> 
> Would the community actually adopt a policy like that? No...
> How about
> 
> "Any network found to be harboring spammers or hackers, will have its
> number resources revoked and automatically become ineligible
> to receive any additional resources in the future.
> 
> Consistent existence of listing by a recognized public DNS RBL
> of any assigned IP address, for a period of 24 hours or longer,
> will result in a single warning;  if not corrected, all resources will
> be temporarily revoked after 7 days.
> 
> If the IP address is not found in good standing with the RBL
> within 21 days, revokation becomes permanent.
> "
> 
> That's probably something more likely to be proposed seriously
> 
If such a policy were to pass, do you think that legacy resources
should somehow be exempted from it?

Owen

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://lists.arin.net/pipermail/arin-ppml/attachments/20110502/27f09566/attachment.htm>