On Sat, Sep 14, 2013 at 5:47 PM, Owen DeLong <o...@delong.com> wrote: > On Sep 13, 2013, at 8:53 AM, William Herrin <b...@herrin.us> wrote: >> The intent of the policy proposal is to keep the use of ARIN addresses >> in-region. I say this with the utmost respect: A 20% rule doesn't do >> that. It does, however, create a new and potentially onerous >> documentary burden on every registrant requesting addresses. > > With all due respect, if that's the intent, then I oppose the policy.
Hi Owen, My paragraph above is in error. Terri clarified the intent of the draft several messages ago. Paraphrasing: the authors want better public records so they know who to go to or go after when there is a law enforcement issue. And they'd like that to be someone within their respective jurisdictions. They would have us tighten eligibility to those folks with some kind of substantive legal presence in the region. Something more than "We've registered a Delaware LLC and park IP addresses on rented equipment in a rented data center." Based on her clarification, I'd drop the language which seeks to have the number resources employed in-region. That muddies the issue and makes consensus harder than it needs to be. The issue is not where the IP addresses are used, but whether the registrant can be compelled to cooperate with local law enforcement and adhere to local law. >> More, "plurality" makes the 20% rule needlessly complicated. I have to >> keep 20% in the ARIN region... unless I have 23% in the RIPE region >> and then I need to keep 24% in the ARIN region unless I have 30% in >> the APNIC region in which case I need 31% in the ARIN region, but if >> that drops the RIPE region down to 27% I can reduce the ARIN region >> holdings to 28%. > > I suppose you can make it sound complex like that, but, in reality, it's > much simpler… You need to make sure that more of your operations > using ARIN space are in the ARIN region than anywhere else. The concept of A.I. is pretty simple too: it's a computer than thinks on a level comparable to man. Now go make it work. An execution of "plurality" in the context you've used it is every bit as nasty as what I described above. Regards, Bill Herrin -- William D. Herrin ................ her...@dirtside.com b...@herrin.us 3005 Crane Dr. ...................... Web: <http://bill.herrin.us/> Falls Church, VA 22042-3004 _______________________________________________ PPML You are receiving this message because you are subscribed to the ARIN Public Policy Mailing List (ARIN-PPML@arin.net). Unsubscribe or manage your mailing list subscription at: http://lists.arin.net/mailman/listinfo/arin-ppml Please contact i...@arin.net if you experience any issues.
