[see Disclaimer]
On Thu, May 02, 2019 at 12:30:38PM +0200, JORDI PALET MARTINEZ via ARIN-PPML wrote: [snip] > So, you???re saying that if an ARIN member is *acting* against > the exclusive rights of use resources allocated to other members, > not by accident, and repeatedly, is just *fine* and ARIN should not > even remind the member that he is acting against the rules? No one says that, and your assertion that people are "with us on this specific formulation of this proposal or obviously support all forms of abuse" is both offensively polarizing and wildly incorrect. Existing process doesn't say that. Again, it is IMO outside the scope of policy, and handling such is covered under item 4 of the first paragraph of https://www.arin.net/reference/tools/fraud_report/ "This reporting process is to be used to notify the American Registry for Internet Numbers, Ltd. (ARIN) of suspected Internet number resource abuse [...] or (4) hijacking of number resources in ARIN's database." It seems that underlying the proposal is some form of unstated dissatisfaction with that process, or the public reporting of results available on https://www.arin.net/reference/tools/fraud_report/results/ Perhaps there's something specific you can cite? Or that you'd be wanting to see more detail for some of the issues? Or that the actions don't go far enough? [snip] > Our goal is to have this in the 5 RIRs. If some of the regions > decide not to go for it, they will have less credibility than > those that go for it. Since you aren't taking this through the Global Policy process, you have chosen to work within the vagaries of different regional processes, which exist as a natural consequence of Global Policy ICP-2. I know you're specifically frustrated with these regional variances, but I'd caution you to reflect upon the the floor discussion from APNIC47 and overall reception for APNIC-prop-126 before indicating that regions who operate differently are somehow "less credible". Flatly, I see this as an assertion that ICP-2 doesn't apply in your situation because it happens to be inconvenient to work through the bottom-up process appropriate for each region. Again, the scope matter for this proposal is now with the board but IMO *all* of this is outside the PDP as it is ARIN business operations. Cheers, Joe -- Posted from my personal account - see X-Disclaimer header. Joe Provo / Gweep / Earthling _______________________________________________ ARIN-PPML You are receiving this message because you are subscribed to the ARIN Public Policy Mailing List ([email protected]). Unsubscribe or manage your mailing list subscription at: https://lists.arin.net/mailman/listinfo/arin-ppml Please contact [email protected] if you experience any issues.
