[arin-ppml] Draft Policy ARIN-2013-6: Allocation of IPv4 and IPv6 Address Space to Out-of-region Requestors - Revised
scottleibrand at gmail.com
Wed Sep 25 17:54:29 EDT 2013
On Wed, Sep 25, 2013 at 11:33 AM, William Herrin <bill at herrin.us> wrote:
> On Wed, Sep 25, 2013 at 10:59 AM, ARIN <info at arin.net> wrote:
> > must
> > provide proof that they (1) are an active business entity legally
> > operating within the ARIN service region
> Speaking for myself, this is unacceptable. I am adamantly, totally,
> 100% against this, in concept and execution.
> This kind of restriction on international commerce is usually reserved
> for national security issues. Foreign interests own ARIN region
> infrastructure and do business with ARIN region customers all the
> time, without registering themselves with the government. Just as
> ARIN-region businesses do in Europe, Asia and elsewhere. Until there's
> a need for employees in a country, it's not generally necessary and
> often inappropriate to incorporate there.
> I think ARIN should continue to follow the same ordinary business
> practice everyone else does when it comes to the legal status of its
> registrants: as long as there's a contactable legal existence
> somewhere (and it's incumbent on the registrant to prove it) they
> should pass muster as an organization capable of requesting resources.
> I don't say this often, but for all of the reasons above I
> respectfully encourage the AC to abandon this proposal. The issues
> raised by our law enforcement colleagues are legitimate, but this
> approach to solving them is not credible.
I oppose this proposal, but did not make a motion to abandon it, because I
think it deserves a hearing from the community in Phoenix. Unless the
community thinks this is an important issue that we need policy around, I
will support abandoning it after that meeting.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
More information about the ARIN-PPML