[arin-ppml] Registry functioning (was: Re: ARIN-PPML 2015-2)

[David Conrad]

John,

>    You obviously feel very strongly about this topic,

What gave it away? :)

>    If I understand your view on the matter, you are concerned that current ARIN
>    registry policy as developed by this community results in “registry inaccuracy”

Not that it does result in inaccuracy, but rather that it can result in inaccuracy.  In as much as policy forces a degradation of accuracy of the registry relative to the reality of the use of ARIN resources on the network, I believe the policy to be fundamentally flawed and inappropriate. However, this may be more of an implementation failure than a failure of policy -- it should be possible to implement a policy without degrading the registry database (unless the policy demands that degradation, of course).

>    I don’t think that you are advocating for ARIN not to follow the community-
>    developed policy (although you were not quite clear when directly asked that)

If the community defines a policy that violates the trust the community has placed in ARIN, then I definitely am advocating that ARIN not follow that policy (community defined or not). For example, if the community defines a policy that requires ARIN to (say) "confiscate" IPv4 addresses from AfriNIC, then yes, I would advocate ARIN not follow the community-developed policy. Would you, as ARIN's CEO, say that policy must be followed?

>    1) Are you simply strongly advocating that community on this mailing list should
>        change the registry policy such that there is no needs-basis for transfers?
> 
>    2) Alternatively, do you believe that the community should not have been allowed
>        to establish any policy for transfers, as registry policy has historically been with
>        respect to the allocation/assignment role of the registry, and the ongoing role of
>        registry administration and maintenance should not have any applicable policy?
> 
>     If the latter (#2), would that belief mean that there should also be no policy setting
>     a minimum block size for transfers or required contact information, etc?    There is
>     some manner in which you feel that ARIN has cast aside proper registry functioning,
>     and I am trying understand if it is consternation with the ARIN community over their
>     policy choices or a structural belief regarding the application of registry policy.

As I stated previously, my argument is not with the policy related to needs based transfers per se, rather it is with how that policy impacts the registration database. If ARIN wishes to disallow non-needs based transfers, I have no issue -- it is a community decision with plusses and minuses. However, as you may have noted, I strongly believe that _if those transfers still occur despite ARIN policy, the registry must still accurately reflect that transfer_. As I mentioned previously, it would be perfectly acceptable (to me at least) to discontinue services such as IN-ADDR.ARPA, routing registry listing, etc. for that out-of-policy transferred block, but the registration database is a _global_ resource that must be accurately maintained.

My unhappiness with ARIN's attempt to create (I'll be polite) a legal framework around the registry database that pretends out-of-ARIN-policy transfers don't exist is exactly that the registry database is global and NOT solely an ARIN resource and ARIN has a responsibility granted by the community when ARIN was formed to ensure the accuracy of their part of that database.

Regards,
-drc

-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 496 bytes
Desc: Message signed with OpenPGP using GPGMail
URL: <https://lists.arin.net/pipermail/arin-ppml/attachments/20150603/3dfee2ba/attachment.sig>