[Services-wg] ARIN Services WG and CKN-23 Proposal Next Steps (was: Re: CKN23-ARIN thoughts)

[Matt Peterson]

A or C seems fine.

On Thu, Jan 26, 2017 at 11:34 PM, John Curran <jcurran at arin.net> wrote:

> On 12 Sep 2016, at 10:05 AM, David R Huberman <daveid at panix.com> wrote:
>
>
> WG and staff,
>
> I have re-reviewed the CKN23 document, and in light of our call, here are
> my final thoughts:
>
> 1) I agree with Matt that hijackers are more normally going to use Whois
> to verify what they already know: that a block is abandoned and ripe for
> their misuse.
>
> 2) If, as reported by staff, ARIN is receiving 5-10 calls a week on this,
> that doesn't seem like a "problem" to me. Rather, it seems like CKN23-ARIN
> is working as intended.  It's causing registrants to contact ARIN and,
> unwillingly or not, learn how to update their registration information. I
> see this as highly valuable to the community -- more up-to-date contact
> information is good.  If the registrant who contacts ARIN to complain does
> not ultimately update their information, then I can only assume it either
> wasn't important enough of a problem to them to actually do anything about
> it, or perhaps they really shouldnt be listed :)
>
> 3) Formally, I support Option #1, the do nothing option.  But I can
> support Option #3, reinstating old resource tech POCs back to the resource,
> but locking to prevent them from making rDNS changes without validation.
>
>
> Members of the ARIN Services Working Group -
>
> Welcome to 2017, including formal resumption of our ARIN Services WG
> efforts!
>
> Based on the discussion within the Services WG (and some discussion in
> halls at
> the October ARIN meeting) on the topic of CKN-23 cleanup,  I am proposing
> that
> the ARIN proceed with Option 3 (i.e. the restoration of the admin and tech
> resource
> points-of-contact and locking the record.)   (See attached email for a
> refresher if
> desired.)
>
> This change would provide legacy resource holders with entries which most
> closely
> resemble that which was originally registered (rather than having only the
> oblique
> “abuse POC” entry), yet does not significantly alter the steps necessary
> to make
> changes to the number resource (i.e. parties must have access to the
> original email
> or perform recovery to make substantial changes to their number
> resources.)
>
> I am now preparing a community consultation proposing this change
> (including the
> supporting material that was reviewed by the Services WG), and will
> include one of
> the following statements or equivalent -
>
>    A) “The ARIN Services Working Group reviewed this proposed change and
> is supportive”
>
>    B) “The ARIN Services Working Group reviewed this proposed change and
> does not support
>          proceeding as suggested.”
>
>    C) “I would like to thank the ARIN Services WG for their helpful review
> of the proposed
>          change and resulting improvements to the supporting materials,
> noting at this time
>          that the Services WG did not take formal position in support or
> opposition to the
>          proposal.”
>
> From the earlier discussion on the list, one could argue for any of the
> above outcomes;
> I’d ask that the Services WG converge on one of the three outcomes listed
> above (and
> I would be happy to coordinate with the Chair to schedule a teleconference
> if needed for
> this purpose.)
>
> Thank you!
> /John
>
> John Curran
> President and CEO
> ARIN
>
> Begin forwarded message:
>
> *From: *John Curran <jcurran at arin.net>
> *Subject: **[Services-wg] ARIN Services WG - CKN23 materials for your
> consideration*
> *Date: *14 June 2016 at 1:58:09 AM PDT
> *To: *"services-wg at arin.net" <services-wg at arin.net>
>
> ARIN Services WG (SWG) -
>
>   Please find attached the “CKN23" project document and an overview slide
> deck
>   of same, for your consideration.   Leslie Nobile produced these and is
> available
>   to brief the Services WG on the issue and potential options for moving
> forward.
>
>   It would be my desire the Services WG consider the matter and provide an
> initial
>   recommendation on how to proceed.  I would inform the ARIN community of
> this
>   direction by putting the matter out for community consultation along
> with the SWG’s
>   recommendation.
>
>   Please review the materials at your convenience, and we’ll arrange a
> teleconference
>   in the near future to review jointly.
>
> Thank you!
> /John
>
> John Curran
> President and CEO
> ARIN
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Services-wg mailing list
> Services-wg at arin.net
> http://lists.arin.net/mailman/listinfo/services-wg
>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://lists.arin.net/pipermail/services-wg/attachments/20170127/60942d7c/attachment.html>