Owen, On Aug 14, 2010, at 8:40 AM, Owen DeLong wrote: > Let's clarify the definition of abuse in this context. We are not talking > about people who use their IPs to abuse the network. We are talking about > resource recipients who use their allocations or assignments in contravention > to the policies under which they received them (and thus contrary to the RSA > which they signed when they received them).
The challenge ARIN (and to a lesser extent, the other RIRs) faces is that in a very short time, we're going to have a system in which there will be folks barred from entering a market because they signed an RSA while at the same time, there will be others who will act without this restriction. I honestly don't see how this system will be stable and instability breeds all sorts of things (some perhaps positive, most probably negative). When resources were plentiful this dichotomy could be mostly ignored. Resources are soon not to be plentiful. It has been depressing to watch participants in ARIN (in particular) suggest all will be well if people would just sign away their rights via an LRSA, move to IPv6 overnight, abide by increasingly Byzantine rules, accept that folks were always under ARIN's policies and they just didn't know it, etc. Pragmatically speaking, it seems the most likely to be successful way of maintaining stability with the impending resource exhaustion state is to give up pretenses of being a regulatory agency and concentrate on the role of being a titles registry. I figure if the existing RIRs don't do it, someone else will. But perhaps I'm missing something since I too gave up on PPML some time back. Regards, -drc
