[arin-ppml] prop266 - re-framing the discussion

Ricardo Patara ricpatara at gmail.com
Fri May 3 07:43:15 EDT 2019


>> And assume the legal liability for it ?
> Sure. As long as it doesn't break any contract. Do you think hijackers
> will sue ARIN by breaking their business model???

you are only looking at one side. the acussed "hijacked" could be not a
bad guy, and might sue ARIN due to an error.

bad guys would do nothing and move forward to exploit other breaches.

unless we "the community" promote better and good pratices, thoses
"breaches" will not be closed and no policy would solve the problems

>> If ARIN determines that a member has done something "bad", the
>> hijacked sues the "bad" member on the grounds that ARIN has determined
>> that they were "bad", and member sues ARIN because ARIN dared to label
>> them "bad".
> Actually, i think the proposal doesn't propose ARIN will have to
> determine anything. It should just rely on independent, multiple, expert
> knowledge.

those experts would not answer for any mistaken report.
according the policy is ARIN the one to publish the result of such
investigation and would be up to ARIN to act on it.

so, any legal responsibility would be on ARIN.

just to add.
those so called "experts" would be doing their investigation on data
collected for other objectives not the one proposed in the policy.

there was never any guarantees on those views/archives of collected routes.

more legal risks, I see...


More information about the ARIN-PPML mailing list