[arin-ppml] IPv4 SWIP requirements (?)

[Cj Aronson]

Peter

The draft is still on the AC's docket and the shepherds are working on it.
I think it should be part of this discussion so I mentioned it so that
folks could take a look.

Thanks!
-----Cathy


{Ô,Ô}
  (( ))
  ◊  ◊

On Fri, May 26, 2017 at 5:34 PM, Peter Thimmesch <peter.thimmesch at addrex.net
> wrote:

> Hello Cathy,
>
> Yes, the was some rather heated discussion at the ARIN meeting in New
> Orleans about the proposed wording in 3.6.7 Non-Responsive Point of
> Contact Records. I believe, please correct me if you think otherwise, that
> the consensus of opinions that spoke at the meeting were strongly against
> the removing of records from public Whois. Therefore pointing someone to
> consider this type of punitive action would be seemingly designed to do
> what?
>
> What problem is trying to be solved with this proposed policy? Is it to
> align the two existing policies or to create a punitive measure?
>
> Regards,
>
> Peter Thimmesch
>
>
> On May 26, 2017, at 19:09, Cj Aronson <cja at daydream.com> wrote:
>
> Scott,
>
> On Fri, May 26, 2017 at 4:45 PM, Scott Leibrand <scottleibrand at gmail.com>
> wrote:
>
>> On Fri, May 26, 2017 at 3:32 PM, Ronald F. Guilmette <
>> rfg at tristatelogic.com> wrote:
>>
>>>
>>> In message <8A3A301D-39B5-4F81-8E2C-90E23B81919E at panix.com>,
>>> David Huberman <daveid at panix.com> wrote:
>>>
>>> >In short, there is an argument that the SWIP rules are no-op now. So to
>>> answer
>>> >your question directly; what do you do? Nothing. Those days are long
>>> gone
>>> >and ARIN has other focuses now.
>>>
>>> So, let me see if I understand this...
>>>
>>> ARIN doesn't, can't, and most probably won't either enforce the existing
>>> (IPv4) SWIP rules, nor, for that matter, any new SWIP rules that may be
>>> drafted and/or promulgated with respect to IPv6.  Is that about the size
>>> of it?
>>>
>>
>> Pretty much, unless someone comes up with a new method of enforcing SWIP
>> rules.  Some of the discussions with law enforcement could eventually
>> result in such carrots or sticks, but no one has proposed any specifics yet.
>>
>
> There is this draft policy that has a few "sticks" at least for
> delegations to downstream ISPs.
> https://www.arin.net/policy/proposals/2017_3.html
>
>>
>>
>>>
>>> ----Cathy
>
> _______________________________________________
> PPML
> 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:
> http://lists.arin.net/mailman/listinfo/arin-ppml
> Please contact info at arin.net if you experience any issues.
>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://lists.arin.net/pipermail/arin-ppml/attachments/20170527/c197e9f2/attachment.htm>