[arin-ppml] Draft Policy ARIN-2019-2: Waiting List Block Size Restriction
robert at cubemotion.com
Tue Feb 26 18:07:44 EST 2019
I agree with Ronald’s comments here. It is a disservice to the community to cite abuse in previous waiting list requests and not publicize said abuse for scrutiny.
robert at cubemotion.com
M: +1 (844) 244-8140 ex. 512
300 Lenora Street #454, Seattle, WA, 98121
> On Feb 26, 2019, at 2:51 PM, Ronald F. Guilmette <rfg at tristatelogic.com> wrote:
> In message <39f01673-b743-7358-b41a-bc7ea93500aa at arin.net>,
> ARIN <info at arin.net> wrote:
>> Draft Policy ARIN-2019-2: Waiting List Block Size Restriction
>> Problem Statement:
>> A substantial amount of misuse of the waiting list is suspected by ARIN
>> The problem is serious enough that the ARIN Board of Trustees has
>> suspended issuance of number resources while a solution to this problem
>> is found...
> Although I heartily applaud any and all efforts by ARIN to reduce either
> the opportunities for, or the incentivies for "gaming the system", I have
> to say that it is my feeling that it is not exactly fair to ask the
> community to pass judgement, one way or the other, on a proposal which
> is based on some rather startling claims AND where absolutely -zero-
> factual documentation is provided to back up those claims. I quote:
> The problem is serious enough that the ARIN Board of Trustees has
> suspended issuance of number resources while a solution to this
> problem is found...
> So, the ARIN community is being asked to take on faith the assertion
> that there are vast unseen hoards of entities that are, and that have
> been, gaming the system in the manner described, even though not a
> single one of these is identified by name. Have I misunderstood?
> I, for one, have no doubts that there are indeed plenty of rational
> actors (in the economic sense) who would most certainly seek to work
> within the outer limits of existing policies, and seek their own
> private economic advantage without regard for such niceties as respect
> for the intent of existing policies or for the reasonable stewardship
> of number resourcs in the general interest of all. But who are these
> allegedy greedy actors in this specific instance? And how many of
> them are there, actually?
> To the extent that whoever is bringing this proposal forward is
> deliberately avoiding transparency about who is doing the things claimed,
> that person or persons is/are doing a disservice to this proposal, to
> their own objectives in putting it forward, and to the ARIN community
> generally, which is now being asked to pass on a resolution in the
> utter absence of any evidence at all to support its underlying premise.
> I hope that this point, i.e. the utter lack of supporting evidence
> for this proposal, will not go unnoticed, especially as it is
> illustrative of an even larger and an even more longstanding problem.
> To put in bluntly, ARIN has a problem, and has had, for a very long
> time now. On the one hand, it seeks to hold itself up as a good
> shepard of the number resources in its porfolio, acting in an always
> even handed manner for the benefit of the community as a whole, while
> on the other hand, as evidenced by the total lack of supporting
> documentation for this proposal, it also still tries to act like some
> old-school old boy's club, conveniently hiding the dirty laundry away
> whenever out-of-town guests arrive. These two goals are, I would argue,
> fundamentally incompatible.
> There are two opposite poles here. There is transparancy and the public
> good, and then there is secrecy, skulduggery and subterfuge. Anyone who
> has been closely following the headlines of late should know that by now.
> My only wish is that ARIN would pick one or the other of these poles
> and then own it. I understand that there exists this long tradition
> of trying to straddle both, of pretending to be acting in the interests
> of the General Good while still keeping utterly confidential all of the
> dirty little secrets of ARIN's constituent commercial entities, but it
> really is getting old and tiresome. And it does not serve the common
> I seriously doubt that anything I say here will result in any sudden
> new blossming of transparanecy on the part of ARIN, and I do not
> seriously anticipate that any of the people who know the actual facts
> with respect to the alleged "gaming" are ever going to actually or
> publicly out any of the alleged swarm of Bad Actors that, we are told,
> are doing this gaming in large numbers. But I can and do hope, at least,
> that the people on this list will forgive me this indelicate outburst,
> and try to understand that I felt compelled to make it.
> I see rampant abuse of the Internet, day in and day out, every bit of which
> involves number resources, said resources having been obtained, by hook or
> by crook, and virtually all of this online evil that I see is the proverbial
> "riddle, wrapped in a mystery, inside an enigma", apparently because the
> Good Stewards of the address space wanted it that way. Therefore, my friends,
> please do not begrudge me for asking for a little transparency from time
> to time, even if I know ahead of time that I'm totally unlikely to get it.
> Call me old-fashioned if you like, but I'd just like to know, every once
> and awhile, who exactly is screwing me and/or all of us. That alone would
> be a most refreshing change.
> 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.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
More information about the ARIN-PPML