<!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>Hi Owen, <EM>answers in italics</EM></FONT></DIV>
<BLOCKQUOTE
style="BORDER-LEFT: #000000 2px solid; PADDING-LEFT: 5px; PADDING-RIGHT: 0px; MARGIN-LEFT: 5px; MARGIN-RIGHT: 0px"
dir=ltr>
<DIV> Now, if you mentioned the judiciary, you might have a point, but,
you did not. You chose</DIV>
<DIV>the governor.</DIV>
<DIV><FONT size=2 face=Arial></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT size=2 face=Arial><EM>Small case "g" governor, see how
semantic this can get. I think with your response, my concept is
clear.</EM></FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT size=2 face=Arial><EM>If you pretend I mentioned judiciary, then
maybe you can sense that what I am trying to say is that it can be argued
either way in terms of authority.</EM></FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT size=2 face=Arial><EM>And that argument is boring. I don't think
the authority structure is as clear as you describe. Or as I conceive it.
</EM></FONT></DIV>
<DIV><EM><FONT size=2 face=Arial>Could be that is uniquely murky, and seems to
be in the midst of transition away from US government control, in any case,
leading to further murkiness.</FONT></EM></DIV></BLOCKQUOTE>
<BLOCKQUOTE
style="BORDER-LEFT: #000000 2px solid; PADDING-LEFT: 5px; PADDING-RIGHT: 0px; MARGIN-LEFT: 5px; MARGIN-RIGHT: 0px"
dir=ltr>
<DIV>></DIV>
<DIV>></DIV>
<DIV>No, it proffers one possible set of requirements which could be used to
do so.</DIV>
<DIV>That is (and was) my point. Other than the author, there is no reliable
evidence</DIV>
<DIV>that anyone has reviewed or accepted this as the way such a thing
should</DIV>
<DIV>be done, let alone the way they would be done if such a structure were to
be</DIV>
<DIV>created.</DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT size=2 face=Arial><EM>OK, we can read the letter. It's pretty clear
it's a proposed (not ratified) set of standards for private ip registries,
based on those existing for DNS registries.</EM></FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT size=2 face=Arial><EM>I never said it was reviewed or accepted,
just that Benson's proposals lacked these kinds of regulations on new registry
entities.</EM></FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT size=2 face=Arial><EM>I don't pretend to know what would happen if
the author of the letter's proposals were accepted, and the Board of ICANN
decided to implement them.</EM></FONT></DIV>
<DIV><EM><FONT size=2 face=Arial>My suspicion is that they would somehow
become policy, though through what mechanism, I don't
know.</FONT><BR></EM></DIV>
<BLOCKQUOTE type="cite"><SPAN
style="WIDOWS: 2; TEXT-TRANSFORM: none; TEXT-INDENT: 0px; BORDER-COLLAPSE: separate; FONT: medium Helvetica; WHITE-SPACE: normal; ORPHANS: 2; LETTER-SPACING: normal; WORD-SPACING: 0px; -webkit-border-horizontal-spacing: 0px; -webkit-border-vertical-spacing: 0px; -webkit-text-decorations-in-effect: none; -webkit-text-size-adjust: auto; -webkit-text-stroke-width: 0px"
class=Apple-style-span>
<DIV
style="WORD-WRAP: break-word; -webkit-nbsp-mode: space; -webkit-line-break: after-white-space"
bgcolor="#ffffff">
<BLOCKQUOTE
style="Z-INDEX: auto; POSITION: static; BORDER-LEFT: rgb(0,0,0) 2px solid; PADDING-LEFT: 5px; PADDING-RIGHT: 0px; MARGIN-LEFT: 5px; MARGIN-RIGHT: 0px"
dir=ltr>
<BLOCKQUOTE type="cite"><SPAN
style="WIDOWS: 2; TEXT-TRANSFORM: none; TEXT-INDENT: 0px; BORDER-COLLAPSE: separate; FONT: medium Helvetica; WHITE-SPACE: normal; ORPHANS: 2; LETTER-SPACING: normal; WORD-SPACING: 0px; -webkit-border-horizontal-spacing: 0px; -webkit-border-vertical-spacing: 0px; -webkit-text-decorations-in-effect: none; -webkit-text-size-adjust: auto; -webkit-text-stroke-width: 0px"
class=Apple-style-span>
<DIV
style="WORD-WRAP: break-word; -webkit-nbsp-mode: space; -webkit-line-break: after-white-space"
bgcolor="#ffffff">
<DIV>
<DIV><FONT size=2 face=Arial></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><SPAN class=f><SPAN class=gl><FONT size=2 face=Arial>I just skimmed
it, but if the community decided that Benson's proposals suffered only
from a lack of oversight, and required action at a global level, then
perhaps they will add their voice to the support which I
offered.</FONT></SPAN></SPAN></DIV></DIV></DIV></SPAN></BLOCKQUOTE>
<BLOCKQUOTE type="cite"><SPAN
style="WIDOWS: 2; TEXT-TRANSFORM: none; TEXT-INDENT: 0px; BORDER-COLLAPSE: separate; FONT: medium Helvetica; WHITE-SPACE: normal; ORPHANS: 2; LETTER-SPACING: normal; WORD-SPACING: 0px; -webkit-border-horizontal-spacing: 0px; -webkit-border-vertical-spacing: 0px; -webkit-text-decorations-in-effect: none; -webkit-text-size-adjust: auto; -webkit-text-stroke-width: 0px"
class=Apple-style-span>
<DIV
style="WORD-WRAP: break-word; -webkit-nbsp-mode: space; -webkit-line-break: after-white-space"
bgcolor="#ffffff">
<DIV>
<DIV> </DIV></DIV></DIV></SPAN></BLOCKQUOTE>
<DIV>Perhaps, but, you would still need a global policy proposal to voice
support for.</DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT size=2 face=Arial><STRONG>Unless ICANN board actually does make
the decision they are being asked to make. The link above is policy
proposal on the ICANN correspondence page, and it is referenced in this
letter:</STRONG></FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT size=2 face=Arial><A
href="http://www.icann.org/en/correspondence/holtzman-to-olive-02mar11-en.pdf">http://www.icann.org/en/correspondence/holtzman-to-olive-02mar11-en.pdf</A> <STRONG>providing
reasons for requesting the decision at the ICANN board level. Based
on the appeal to the authority of the DoC contract, I expect there could
be a further appeal to the DoC or NTIA level if the ICANN board decides
not to make a decision. It is interesting that ICANN requested information
from ARIN instead of summarily dismissing the request as coming outside of
policy. ARIN's reply to ICANN is on the same site.</STRONG></FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT size=2
face=Arial></FONT> </DIV></BLOCKQUOTE></DIV></SPAN></BLOCKQUOTE>
<DIV>I cannot see any correspondence that shows ICANN board requesting
information from ARIN that was done after ICANN received this letter.</DIV>
<DIV>Can you point to a link to such?</DIV>
<DIV><FONT size=2 face=Arial></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT size=2 face=Arial><EM>Here is the sequence</EM></FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT size=2 face=Arial><A
href="http://icann.org/en/correspondence/holtzman-to-beckstrom-27jan11-en.pdf"><EM>http://icann.org/en/correspondence/holtzman-to-beckstrom-27jan11-en.pdf</EM></A><EM>
T</EM></FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT size=2 face=Arial><EM>This was a letter of complaint to ICANN
and a request for an appeal at the ICANN level based on authority derived from
the DoC contract.</EM></FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT size=2 face=Arial><EM></EM></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT size=2 face=Arial><A
href="http://icann.org/en/correspondence/beckstrom-to-curran-01mar11-en.pdf"><EM>http://icann.org/en/correspondence/beckstrom-to-curran-01mar11-en.pdf</EM></A></FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT size=2 face=Arial><EM>This is the letter from ICANN to ARIN which
requests more information instead of summarily dismissing the request as
coming outside of normal policy development channels.</EM></FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT size=2 face=Arial><EM></EM></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT size=2 face=Arial><A
href="http://icann.org/en/correspondence/curran-to-beckstrom-02mar11-en.pdf"><EM>http://icann.org/en/correspondence/curran-to-beckstrom-02mar11-en.pdf</EM></A></FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT size=2 face=Arial><EM>This is John Curran's reply to
ICANN</EM></FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT size=2 face=Arial><EM></EM></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT size=2 face=Arial><A
href="http://icann.org/en/correspondence/holtzman-to-olive-02mar11-en.pdf"><EM>http://icann.org/en/correspondence/holtzman-to-olive-02mar11-en.pdf</EM></A></FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT size=2 face=Arial><EM>This is the letter which includes the
proposed regulations on new registries.</EM></FONT></DIV><FONT size=2
face=Arial></FONT></BLOCKQUOTE>
<BLOCKQUOTE
style="BORDER-LEFT: #000000 2px solid; PADDING-LEFT: 5px; PADDING-RIGHT: 0px; MARGIN-LEFT: 5px; MARGIN-RIGHT: 0px"
dir=ltr>
<DIV><FONT size=2 face=Arial><EM>I'm pretty sure that's the flow. A request
last year from Depository to ARIN for bulk whois data in order to provide
directory services.</EM></FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT size=2 face=Arial><EM>ARIN denies it and says it violates the AUP,
it's not a valid purpose for bulk access.</EM></FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT size=2 face=Arial><EM>Then the letters above start, the first one
is an appeal to ICANN, which I took as a means of going over ARIN's head,
although such talk of levels is like a verbal Escher drawing,
apparently.</EM></FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT size=2 face=Arial><EM>You seem certain that ICANN both won't and
can't make this decision and make it apply to ARIN's sharing of whois data.
I'm not so sanguine. </EM></FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT size=2 face=Arial><EM>I think courts seem more likely to deal with
contracts then Memorandums and Agreements of Understanding.</EM></FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT size=2 face=Arial><EM>My guess, and I'm not a lawyer, is that
should push come to shove in a legal arena, the courts may decide that the
authority comes from the DoC contract.</EM></FONT></DIV>
<DIV><EM><FONT size=2 face=Arial>It could be as you say, that ICANN has no
authority to dictate anything to ARIN; the letters say there is no contract
between ARIN and ICANN.</FONT></EM></DIV>
<DIV><FONT size=2 face=Arial><EM>Just a guess, and I could be wrong. If it
turns out that ICANN either can't or won't make the decision, as John points
out in his letter, (or maybe elsewhere) that there remains the ability to
change the global policy which specifies regional registry properties which he
believes preclude private registries. Perhaps ICANN has power to make those
changes, and the ARIN MoU would then require ARIN to submit?</EM></FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT size=2 face=Arial></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><SPAN
style="WIDOWS: 2; TEXT-TRANSFORM: none; TEXT-INDENT: 0px; BORDER-COLLAPSE: separate; FONT: medium Helvetica; WHITE-SPACE: normal; ORPHANS: 2; LETTER-SPACING: normal; WORD-SPACING: 0px; -webkit-border-horizontal-spacing: 0px; -webkit-border-vertical-spacing: 0px; -webkit-text-decorations-in-effect: none; -webkit-text-size-adjust: auto; -webkit-text-stroke-width: 0px"
class=Apple-style-span><FONT size=2 face=Arial></FONT><BR>
<DIV><FONT size=2 face=Arial><STRONG>>Proper stewardship is to make policy
that will increase the supply of addresses and bring down their price, while
increasing whois reliability and removing the biggest distinction between
legacy and >non-legacy addresses.</STRONG></FONT></DIV></DIV>
<DIV></SPAN>>In general, I would agree with you about the goals of proper
stewardship. Obviously, I do not</DIV>
<DIV>>think that is the effect competing registries would have.</DIV>
<DIV><FONT size=2 face=Arial></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT size=2 face=Arial><EM>Maybe I have found an appealing argument in
the idea that increasing supply will reduce price. Since in a post-exhaust
world, even those with need will have to pay for IP addresses, maybe
the best stewardship is the policy which will lead to the lowest
price? Should frame the debate in that way? Which policies should
be implemented which will create the greatest supply to replace the free pool,
in order that price be driven down? Which types of markets lead to
lowest prices, those with fewer regulations or those with more
regulations? Is low price to be desired by the proper steward? Now we
are stewards of the rules and not the addresses.</EM></FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT size=2 face=Arial></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT size=2 face=Arial></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><SPAN
style="WIDOWS: 2; TEXT-TRANSFORM: none; TEXT-INDENT: 0px; BORDER-COLLAPSE: separate; FONT: medium Helvetica; WHITE-SPACE: normal; ORPHANS: 2; LETTER-SPACING: normal; WORD-SPACING: 0px; -webkit-border-horizontal-spacing: 0px; -webkit-border-vertical-spacing: 0px; -webkit-text-decorations-in-effect: none; -webkit-text-size-adjust: auto; -webkit-text-stroke-width: 0px"
class=Apple-style-span><FONT size=2 face=Arial></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV>
<BLOCKQUOTE type="cite">
<DIV
style="WORD-WRAP: break-word; -webkit-nbsp-mode: space; -webkit-line-break: after-white-space"
bgcolor="#ffffff">
<BLOCKQUOTE
style="Z-INDEX: auto; POSITION: static; BORDER-LEFT: rgb(0,0,0) 2px solid; PADDING-LEFT: 5px; PADDING-RIGHT: 0px; MARGIN-LEFT: 5px; MARGIN-RIGHT: 0px"
dir=ltr>
<DIV><FONT size=2 face=Arial><STRONG>Are you accusing the APNIC community
of abandoning stewardship, and if they did, why do you think they did
that? Is the region largely peopled by IPv4
profiteers?</STRONG></FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT size=2
face=Arial></FONT> </DIV></BLOCKQUOTE></DIV></SPAN></BLOCKQUOTE>>Yes.
I believe that the transfer policy in the APNIC region was an abandonment of
their</DIV>
<DIV>>stewardship role and I have said as much on their policy development
mailing list.</DIV>
<DIV>>Why? Because Geoff Huston and a few other leaders in that community
pushed long</DIV>
<DIV>>and hard to get that position adopted mainly by creating fear that
failing to do so would</DIV>
<DIV>>render all RIR policy meaningless because the RIR policy would simply
be bypassed</DIV>
<DIV>>in favor of people doing what they wanted anyway.</DIV>
<DIV><FONT size=2 face=Arial></FONT><BR></DIV>
<DIV>>Personally, I think that argument is absurd. Making theft legal just
because you can't</DIV>
<DIV>>stop people from stealing makes no sense to me.</DIV>
<DIV><FONT size=2 face=Arial></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT size=2 face=Arial><EM>Well, that information leads me to discount
the deaggregation argument against removing need
requirements.</EM></FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT size=2 face=Arial><EM>I consider Geoff Huston to be en expert
on BGP tables and defer to his judgement here. </EM></FONT></DIV>
<DIV><EM><FONT size=2 face=Arial>Clearly he did not see the risk of BGP table
growth as a cause to retain needs requirements</FONT><FONT size=2
face=Arial>.</FONT></EM></DIV>
<DIV><FONT size=2 face=Arial><EM>I hope the ARIN community can take away the
idea that it is not just a few IPv4 profiteers who have different visions of
stewardship.</EM></FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT size=2 face=Arial></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT size=2 face=Arial></FONT> </DIV><FONT size=2
face=Arial></FONT></BLOCKQUOTE>
<BLOCKQUOTE
style="BORDER-LEFT: #000000 2px solid; PADDING-LEFT: 5px; PADDING-RIGHT: 0px; MARGIN-LEFT: 5px; MARGIN-RIGHT: 0px"
dir=ltr>
<DIV>Let me know if you need any help. While I don't agree with your goals and
think they would be bad policy, I am happy to help</DIV>
<DIV>bring such proposal before the community for their
consideration.<BR></DIV>
<DIV>Owen</DIV><FONT size=2 face=Arial></FONT></BLOCKQUOTE>
<BLOCKQUOTE
style="BORDER-LEFT: #000000 2px solid; PADDING-LEFT: 5px; PADDING-RIGHT: 0px; MARGIN-LEFT: 5px; MARGIN-RIGHT: 0px"
dir=ltr>
<DIV><FONT size=2 face=Arial><EM>Thanks, I appreciate the help and the
advice.</EM></FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT size=2 face=Arial><EM>Regards,</EM></FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT size=2 face=Arial><EM>Mike</EM></FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT size=2 face=Arial></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><BR></DIV></BLOCKQUOTE></BODY></HTML>