[arin-ppml] ARIN-prop-180 ISP Private Reassignment

[Christoph Blecker]

On Thu, Aug 9, 2012 at 9:15 AM, Jeffrey Lyon
<jeffrey.lyon at blacklotus.net> wrote:
> I am willing to support on the basis that there are plenty of other
> ways to forge justification. Not allowing this proposal on that basis
> does not serve any tangible result.  When we submit for additional
> resources, a large percentage of our space is "Internal
> Infrastructure." One could argue that we could abuse this and make our
> entire space "Internal Infrastructure." The reality is that ARIN will
> begin to ask questions if a large proportion of your space is
> ambiguous and ask for more specific details.

I don't think it's a good move to say that because there is one way to
game the system is justification that we should remove all rules.

TL;DR version: Opposed as written. Existing is enough.

Long version: I think that the existing residential privacy provisions
should be enough. While there may be legitimate reasons for a company
to prefer going private with their addresses, the reality is that
those preferences have to be weighed against other community interests
like transparency of assignments and law enforcement considerations.

Here's a scenario to think about. In many cases, ISPs are really tight
with their customer data and will not release it without a court
order. Say there is some sort of time sensitive issue that law
enforcement needs to track down an IP address. Getting a court order
for the ISP to release their customer information, then getting
another court order against the entity takes time. At least having a
clue if they're on the right track as far as the owner of an IP can
help law enforcement speed things up.

There is a lot of other background that may be best for a separate
discussion, but in Canada the government is looking at changing laws
that law enforcement doesn't need a court order to force ISPs to give
up customer details. Allowing ISPs to hide reassignments only plays
into that hand, where we force law makers to give law enforcement more
powers, which can potentially lead to abuses by government and law
enforcement themselves.

In reality, I think what exists now is a good balance between
transparency and privacy. Unfortunately, without more specifics about
what Yi's customer is trying to achieve (which at this point is all
speculation), I don't think there is enough justification to change
policy.

Cheers,
Christoph