<!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0 Transitional//EN">
<HTML><HEAD>
<META content="text/html; charset=iso-8859-1" http-equiv=Content-Type>
<META name=GENERATOR content="MSHTML 8.00.6001.19046">
<STYLE></STYLE>
</HEAD>
<BODY
style="WORD-WRAP: break-word; -webkit-nbsp-mode: space; -webkit-line-break: after-white-space"
bgColor=#ffffff>
<DIV><FONT size=2 face=Arial><FONT size=3 face="Times New Roman">>Not true.
The chaos and disruption posed by unregulated registries will</FONT>
<DIV>>increase the costs to ARIN, ARIN members, and other participants in
the</DIV>
<DIV>>industry regardless of whether they change registries or not.</DIV>
<DIV>>Owen</DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV>This is an assertion unsupported by facts. What additional costs will be
imposed on ARIN?</DIV>
<DIV>True they would have to update a field in the whois database to point to
the authoritative registry, sort of like the pointers to other RIRs in there
now.</DIV>
<DIV>
<DIV>The letter to ICANN that began this thread included a set of regulations
adopted from those used in the creation of private DNS registries.</DIV>
<DIV>Why do you keep insisting they would be unregulated?</DIV>
<DIV>Like the RIR's, like DNS Registries, all approved registries do answer
to the community through adherence to those community-defined regulations.</DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV>If you are concerned about groundup or community development, may I suggest
revisiting Benson's proposals, which were an attempt to create the policy which
would allow for the creation of alternate registries under ARIN policy, but
which met with an untimely end based on John Curran's feelings that the
decisions had to be made at a global level. Now the
argument holds that at that global level decisions should be
made by the same small group of individuals running the RIRs,
basically.</DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV>You are right in saying there are no policies about how domain names are
justified or acquired in the rules which apply to DNS registries.</DIV>
<DIV>That's as it should be, and there is a burgeoning set of case law and
trademark law that serves to answer those questions. </DIV>
<DIV>I put more trust in the collective brainpower of worldwide jurisprudence
and centuries of commonlaw experience to decide these issues than a tiny cabal
of individuals with a vested interest in maintaining their positions in the
status quo. Let the DNS registries concentrate on uniqueness and adherence to
law as it develops, let number registries concentrate on uniqueness and
title.</DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV>I think we understand your position on free markets, I am trying to avoid
discussions of analogies far afield from current topics, so suffice it to say I
disagree that the instances you reference resulted from activities in free
markets.</DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV>Regards,</DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV>Mike</DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV> </DIV></DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV> </DIV></FONT></DIV>
<BLOCKQUOTE
style="BORDER-LEFT: #000000 2px solid; PADDING-LEFT: 5px; PADDING-RIGHT: 0px; MARGIN-LEFT: 5px; MARGIN-RIGHT: 0px">
<DIV style="FONT: 10pt arial">----- Original Message ----- </DIV>
<DIV
style="FONT: 10pt arial; BACKGROUND: #e4e4e4; font-color: black"><B>From:</B>
<A title=owen@delong.com href="mailto:owen@delong.com">Owen DeLong</A> </DIV>
<DIV style="FONT: 10pt arial"><B>To:</B> <A title=mike@nationwideinc.com
href="mailto:mike@nationwideinc.com">Mike Burns</A> </DIV>
<DIV style="FONT: 10pt arial"><B>Cc:</B> <A
title=Daniel_Alexander@Cable.Comcast.com
href="mailto:Daniel_Alexander@Cable.Comcast.com">Alexander, Daniel</A> ; <A
title=arin-ppml@arin.net
href="mailto:arin-ppml@arin.net">arin-ppml@arin.net</A> </DIV>
<DIV style="FONT: 10pt arial"><B>Sent:</B> Monday, May 02, 2011 6:48 PM</DIV>
<DIV style="FONT: 10pt arial"><B>Subject:</B> Re: [arin-ppml] Accusation of
fundamental conflictofinterest/IPaddress policy pitched directly to
ICANN</DIV>
<DIV><BR></DIV><BR>
<DIV>
<DIV>On May 2, 2011, at 1:41 PM, Mike Burns wrote:</DIV><BR
class=Apple-interchange-newline>
<BLOCKQUOTE type="cite">
<DIV>Hi Dan,<BR><BR>The existence of competing registries does not imply a
requirement on anybody to change, so your argument about expense to existing
participants is invalid.<BR><BR></DIV></BLOCKQUOTE>Not true. The chaos and
disruption posed by unregulated registries will</DIV>
<DIV>increase the costs to ARIN, ARIN members, and other participants in
the</DIV>
<DIV>industry regardless of whether they change registries or not.</DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT size=2 face=Arial></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT size=2 face=Arial> </FONT></DIV>
<DIV><BR>
<BLOCKQUOTE type="cite">
<DIV>And yes, the market will sort out bad actors. That's one thing free
markets do.<BR><BR></DIV></BLOCKQUOTE>Right... The market sorted out Enron...
Eventually. However, non of us in</DIV>
<DIV>California got our money back and we're all still paying higher
electric</DIV>
<DIV>bills as a result.</DIV>
<DIV><BR></DIV>
<DIV>The market sorted out the CMOs... Eventually. However, my house is
now</DIV>
<DIV>worth 1/3rd of what it was worth and the new restrictive regulations
on</DIV>
<DIV>refinancing prevent me from taking advantage of the new lower
interest</DIV>
<DIV>rates due to my home being devalued too close to the amount I still
owe</DIV>
<DIV>on it. Unfortunately, I wasn't irresponsible enough to be part of the
cause</DIV>
<DIV>of this problem, so, as a good actor, I am not entitled to any of the
relief</DIV>
<DIV>available from the government for the bad actors.</DIV>
<DIV><BR></DIV>
<DIV>I think I've had enough of the way markets sort out bad actors for a
while.</DIV>
<DIV><BR></DIV>
<DIV>
<BLOCKQUOTE type="cite">
<DIV>Nobody said anything about no oversight, to the contrary I have said
the registries should work under the same framework as
RIRs.<BR><BR></DIV></BLOCKQUOTE>The only oversight of the RIRs is their
community processes and their</DIV>
<DIV>membership-elected boards. If you are OK with the other registries
being</DIV>
<DIV>overseen by these same bodies, then, I'm not sure why you think
they</DIV>
<DIV>would somehow be run differently from the existing RIRs.</DIV>
<DIV><BR>
<BLOCKQUOTE type="cite">
<DIV>Just like all DNS registrars have to comply with rules setup to govern
their behavior.<BR>Before you can be a DNS registrar you have to comply with
the rules, and maintain compliance.<BR><BR></DIV></BLOCKQUOTE>There are
virtually no policies about how domain names are justified or</DIV>
<DIV>acquired in those rules. There are provisions for trademark disputes,
but,</DIV>
<DIV>those are not applicable to IP addresses (unless you think that a</DIV>
<DIV>particular soft drink vendor should be automatically entitled to</DIV>
<DIV>the address 67.79.75.69).</DIV>
<DIV><BR></DIV>
<DIV>Owen</DIV>
<DIV><BR></DIV>
<DIV>
<BLOCKQUOTE type="cite">
<DIV>It's true that I was being forward thinking about the additional
services competing registries might offer, but my point is that those
services would only be offered if there was a demand for them, if the
private registries are to endure.<BR><FONT class=Apple-style-span
color=#000000><FONT class=Apple-style-span
color=#144fae><BR></FONT></FONT></DIV></BLOCKQUOTE>
<BLOCKQUOTE type="cite">
<DIV><BR>Regards,<BR><BR>Mike<BR><BR>----- Original Message ----- From:
"Alexander, Daniel" <<A
href="mailto:Daniel_Alexander@Cable.Comcast.com">Daniel_Alexander@Cable.Comcast.com</A>><BR>To:
"Mike Burns" <<A
href="mailto:mike@nationwideinc.com">mike@nationwideinc.com</A>>; <<A
href="mailto:arin-ppml@arin.net">arin-ppml@arin.net</A>><BR>Sent: Monday,
May 02, 2011 4:30 PM<BR>Subject: Re: [arin-ppml] Accusation of fundamental
conflictofinterest/IPaddress policy pitched directly to
ICANN<BR><BR><BR>Mike,<BR><BR>While I can only speak for myself, I can
attempt to answer your question<BR>of what may perturb some people. You make
several very large assumptions<BR>in your claims, none of which were
captured in the opt-in, opt-out, or any<BR>other proposals.<BR><BR>You speak
of title insurance, legal teams, and other items, ensuring that<BR>a
competitive registry will provide better services than a
community<BR>defined RIR. The problem is none of this is defined or required
in any<BR>suggested framework. While some may provide these services, many
may not,<BR>and there are no mechanisms to protect the ISP's or end users
who rely on<BR>these services.<BR><BR>While many advocates will quickly
reply that the market will sort these<BR>bad actors out, it will be done at
the expense of the people who currently<BR>rely on these RIR provided
services at a fraction of the cost. If<BR>competitive registries are created
without oversight, the burden and<BR>expense of validating registration
records will be shifted to the very<BR>people who are supposed to benefit
from this new model.<BR><BR>This begs the question from some as to what
purpose a commercial registry<BR>would serve other than to make
money.<BR><BR>My opinion only.<BR>Dan Alexander<BR><BR><BR><BR><BR>On 5/2/11
3:33 PM, "Mike Burns" <<A
href="mailto:mike@nationwideinc.com">mike@nationwideinc.com</A>>
wrote:<BR><BR>
<BLOCKQUOTE type="cite"><BR></BLOCKQUOTE>
<BLOCKQUOTE type="cite"><BR></BLOCKQUOTE>
<BLOCKQUOTE type="cite">
<BLOCKQUOTE type="cite">But what is it about ARIN that is broken? What
exactly do you think<BR></BLOCKQUOTE></BLOCKQUOTE>
<BLOCKQUOTE type="cite">
<BLOCKQUOTE type="cite">needs<BR></BLOCKQUOTE></BLOCKQUOTE>
<BLOCKQUOTE type="cite">
<BLOCKQUOTE type="cite">to be fixed?<BR></BLOCKQUOTE></BLOCKQUOTE>
<BLOCKQUOTE type="cite"><BR></BLOCKQUOTE>
<BLOCKQUOTE type="cite">
<BLOCKQUOTE type="cite">The only thing I've gotten out of the
discussions so far is that some<BR></BLOCKQUOTE></BLOCKQUOTE>
<BLOCKQUOTE type="cite">
<BLOCKQUOTE type="cite">people think there is money to be made by
providing IPv4 addresses based<BR></BLOCKQUOTE></BLOCKQUOTE>
<BLOCKQUOTE type="cite">
<BLOCKQUOTE type="cite">on<BR></BLOCKQUOTE></BLOCKQUOTE>
<BLOCKQUOTE type="cite">
<BLOCKQUOTE type="cite">willingness and ability to pay rather than
ARIN's current >demonstrated<BR></BLOCKQUOTE></BLOCKQUOTE>
<BLOCKQUOTE type="cite">
<BLOCKQUOTE type="cite">need policies.<BR></BLOCKQUOTE></BLOCKQUOTE>
<BLOCKQUOTE type="cite"><BR></BLOCKQUOTE>
<BLOCKQUOTE type="cite">
<BLOCKQUOTE type="cite">Why is it to my benefit if someone else makes
money? Particularly if it<BR></BLOCKQUOTE></BLOCKQUOTE>
<BLOCKQUOTE type="cite">
<BLOCKQUOTE type="cite">perturbs the current mechanisms in a way that
costs me money?<BR></BLOCKQUOTE></BLOCKQUOTE>
<BLOCKQUOTE type="cite"><BR></BLOCKQUOTE>
<BLOCKQUOTE type="cite">
<BLOCKQUOTE type="cite">Keith Hare<BR></BLOCKQUOTE></BLOCKQUOTE>
<BLOCKQUOTE type="cite"><BR></BLOCKQUOTE>
<BLOCKQUOTE type="cite"><BR></BLOCKQUOTE>
<BLOCKQUOTE type="cite">Hi Keith,<BR></BLOCKQUOTE>
<BLOCKQUOTE type="cite"><BR></BLOCKQUOTE>
<BLOCKQUOTE type="cite">What is broken about ARIN is that scandalously
large numbers of netblocks<BR></BLOCKQUOTE>
<BLOCKQUOTE type="cite">do<BR></BLOCKQUOTE>
<BLOCKQUOTE type="cite">not have valid POCs, for example. The stewardship
of Whois leaves a lot<BR></BLOCKQUOTE>
<BLOCKQUOTE type="cite">to<BR></BLOCKQUOTE>
<BLOCKQUOTE type="cite">be desired.<BR></BLOCKQUOTE>
<BLOCKQUOTE type="cite">Competitive pressures would help to finally decide
who controls these<BR></BLOCKQUOTE>
<BLOCKQUOTE type="cite">addresses and allow them to be transferred to
those who would pay for<BR></BLOCKQUOTE>
<BLOCKQUOTE type="cite">them.<BR></BLOCKQUOTE>
<BLOCKQUOTE type="cite">Network operators don't really have much of a
choice in accessing Whois<BR></BLOCKQUOTE>
<BLOCKQUOTE type="cite">information to determine the rights to advertise
addresses, and competive<BR></BLOCKQUOTE>
<BLOCKQUOTE type="cite">registries.<BR></BLOCKQUOTE>
<BLOCKQUOTE type="cite">In my experience they rely on attestation and
review of proferred<BR></BLOCKQUOTE>
<BLOCKQUOTE type="cite">chain-of-custody docs when determining who can
advertise which addresses,<BR></BLOCKQUOTE>
<BLOCKQUOTE type="cite">when confronted with inconsistencies with
whois.<BR></BLOCKQUOTE>
<BLOCKQUOTE type="cite">A competitive registry with a title insurance
component will give network<BR></BLOCKQUOTE>
<BLOCKQUOTE type="cite">operators more security when deciding questionable
cases.<BR></BLOCKQUOTE>
<BLOCKQUOTE type="cite"><BR></BLOCKQUOTE>
<BLOCKQUOTE type="cite">What is broken about ARIN is that their transfer
policies are more<BR></BLOCKQUOTE>
<BLOCKQUOTE type="cite">restrictive than APNICs, and that will cause a
flow of addresses out of<BR></BLOCKQUOTE>
<BLOCKQUOTE type="cite">ARIN<BR></BLOCKQUOTE>
<BLOCKQUOTE type="cite">and into APNIC.<BR></BLOCKQUOTE>
<BLOCKQUOTE type="cite">A competitive registry could presumably have a
different transfer policy,<BR></BLOCKQUOTE>
<BLOCKQUOTE type="cite">as<BR></BLOCKQUOTE>
<BLOCKQUOTE type="cite">APNICs differs from ARINs.<BR></BLOCKQUOTE>
<BLOCKQUOTE type="cite"><BR></BLOCKQUOTE>
<BLOCKQUOTE type="cite">What is broken about ARIN is that ARIN has
professed no statutory control<BR></BLOCKQUOTE>
<BLOCKQUOTE type="cite">over legacy addresses in the Plzak declaration in
the Kremen case, and<BR></BLOCKQUOTE>
<BLOCKQUOTE type="cite">yet<BR></BLOCKQUOTE>
<BLOCKQUOTE type="cite">attempts to control the registration of legacy
resources.<BR></BLOCKQUOTE>
<BLOCKQUOTE type="cite">With a private registry, the address rights
holders can choose to opt-out<BR></BLOCKQUOTE>
<BLOCKQUOTE type="cite">of<BR></BLOCKQUOTE>
<BLOCKQUOTE type="cite">ARIN's dictats and choose their registry
voluntarily.<BR></BLOCKQUOTE>
<BLOCKQUOTE type="cite"><BR></BLOCKQUOTE>
<BLOCKQUOTE type="cite">I don't see how the creation of a private registry
will perturb the<BR></BLOCKQUOTE>
<BLOCKQUOTE type="cite">current<BR></BLOCKQUOTE>
<BLOCKQUOTE type="cite">mechanisms in a way that costs you money, could
you share why you feel<BR></BLOCKQUOTE>
<BLOCKQUOTE type="cite">that<BR></BLOCKQUOTE>
<BLOCKQUOTE type="cite">way?<BR></BLOCKQUOTE>
<BLOCKQUOTE type="cite"><BR></BLOCKQUOTE>
<BLOCKQUOTE type="cite">Regards,<BR></BLOCKQUOTE>
<BLOCKQUOTE type="cite"><BR></BLOCKQUOTE>
<BLOCKQUOTE type="cite">Mike Burns<BR></BLOCKQUOTE>
<BLOCKQUOTE type="cite"><BR></BLOCKQUOTE>
<BLOCKQUOTE
type="cite">_______________________________________________<BR></BLOCKQUOTE>
<BLOCKQUOTE type="cite">PPML<BR></BLOCKQUOTE>
<BLOCKQUOTE type="cite">You are receiving this message because you are
subscribed to<BR></BLOCKQUOTE>
<BLOCKQUOTE type="cite">the ARIN Public Policy Mailing List (<A
href="mailto:ARIN-PPML@arin.net">ARIN-PPML@arin.net</A>).<BR></BLOCKQUOTE>
<BLOCKQUOTE type="cite">Unsubscribe or manage your mailing list
subscription at:<BR></BLOCKQUOTE>
<BLOCKQUOTE type="cite"><A
href="http://lists.arin.net/mailman/listinfo/arin-ppml">http://lists.arin.net/mailman/listinfo/arin-ppml</A><BR></BLOCKQUOTE>
<BLOCKQUOTE type="cite">Please contact <A
href="mailto:info@arin.net">info@arin.net</A> if you experience any
issues.<BR></BLOCKQUOTE><BR>_______________________________________________<BR>PPML<BR>You
are receiving this message because you are subscribed to<BR>the ARIN Public
Policy Mailing List (<A
href="mailto:ARIN-PPML@arin.net">ARIN-PPML@arin.net</A>).<BR>Unsubscribe or
manage your mailing list subscription at:<BR><A
href="http://lists.arin.net/mailman/listinfo/arin-ppml">http://lists.arin.net/mailman/listinfo/arin-ppml</A><BR>Please
contact info@arin.net if you experience any
issues.<BR></DIV></BLOCKQUOTE></DIV><BR></BLOCKQUOTE></BODY></HTML>