[arin-ppml] IPv4 Transfer Policy Change to Keep Whois Accurate
tvest at eyeconomics.com
Wed May 11 16:34:57 EDT 2011
While it may or may not be true that your perspective on this question is consonant with that of "the APNIC community," elements within said community have been championing the same broad policy changes that you're advocating here now since the early 1990s. Thus it would seem that the views that you associate yourself with here couldn't possible have anything to do with "current legal realities" -- unless perhaps by "current" you mean something like "twentieth century."
Given that historical fact -- and the apparent success of the RIR stewardship mission over the intervening two decades of possible nonconformity with legal reality -- on what basis could you legitimately claim that abandoning time-tested registry practices that have been integral to maintaining whois accuracy to date represents the best, or perhaps the only way to maintain whois accuracy in the future?
Alternately, if you actually had in mind some other, more recent legal developments -- which by definition could not have any causal relation to policy arguments that predated them by 10-15 years -- a clarification of exactly what those changes in legal reality are would be much appreciated.
On May 11, 2011, at 3:13 PM, Mike Burns wrote:
> Hi Owen and McTim,
> I, along with the APNIC community, could make the claim that you are abandoning the stewardship role in maintaining Whois accuracy, and sacrificing that stewardship role on the altar of an ARIN needs policy developed for the purposes of free pool allocations that does not comply with current legal realities.
> But charges of abandoning stewardship are inflammatory, and I hope we can keep to actual discussions of the implications of my proposal without casting aspersions.
> Let's agree that we all seek the highest standards of stewardship, but disagree on how those standards should be applied.
> I think I could characterize your opposition better by saying that you believe the danger of hoarding and speculation outweigh the risk to whois accuracy.
> Would that be an accurate statement, if not your exclusive objection to the proposal?
> ----- Original Message ----- From: "McTim" <dogwallah at gmail.com>
> To: "Owen DeLong" <owen at delong.com>
> Cc: "Mike Burns" <mike at nationwideinc.com>; <arin-ppml at arin.net>
> Sent: Wednesday, May 11, 2011 2:53 PM
> Subject: Re: [arin-ppml] IPv4 Transfer Policy Change to Keep Whois Accurate
> On Wed, May 11, 2011 at 9:09 PM, Owen DeLong <owen at delong.com> wrote:
>> I oppose the policy as written.
>> Abandoning our stewardship role for the sake of making it more likely
>> people will register their misappropriation of community resources is
>> like legalizing bank robbery in the hopes that the thieves will pay
>> income tax on their ill gotten gains.
> "A name indicates what we seek. An address indicates where it is. A
> route indicates how we get there." Jon Postel
> You are receiving this message because you are subscribed to
> the ARIN Public Policy Mailing List (ARIN-PPML at arin.net).
> Unsubscribe or manage your mailing list subscription at:
> Please contact info at arin.net if you experience any issues.
More information about the ARIN-PPML