On Thu, Jul 14, 2022 at 2:35 PM William Herrin <[email protected]> wrote:
> On Thu, Jul 14, 2022 at 2:18 PM Matthew Petach <[email protected]> > wrote: > > Note that if there's actual indications of wrongdoing, we already > > have a means to file a complaint with ARIN, as John has repeatedly > > pointed out. > > Hi Matthew, > > I think maybe you missed my point. We don't know how ARIN would treat > Ronald's information if filed in a formal complaint and can't > rationally discuss whether that enforcement is consistent with our > policy-level expectations because ARIN doesn't publish enough details > about the complaints, their investigations and the results. There > ought to be a way to open that black box without unduly harming the > folks who get investigated. Like making it all public upon the > investigation's conclusion when all the information is on the table. > Upon finding the complaint unsubstantiated, ARIN could even offer the > registrant the opportunity to redact anything they considered a trade > secret before publication. We'd still end up with a heck of a lot more > information and quite possibly enough information to inform a policy > discussion. > > Regards, > Bill Herrin > Hi Bill, I think it's reasonable for any positive finding of fault that the publicly-revealable information about the fault-finding be made available. But if no fault is found, I don't think it's appropriate to have to release documents or records that were used to demonstrate innocence unless those documents or records had already previously been made public. I think it's sufficient for ARIN to say that the accusation was found to be without merit, and leave it at that. Otherwise we're again punishing the innocent victim by forcing them to dig through the material used and specifically redact the material before it is released. How many of us have staff people we can spare to go through hundreds or thousands of pages of documents to redact material that was provided to ARIN in confidence before it gets published to the world? How many of us would have to take the time to circumscribe or anonymize network diagrams and internal network allocation documents before we submitted them to ARIN if we now had to worry that they might be published to the world based on someone's unmerited accusation? When I was submitting resource requests to ARIN, we provided information at a detail we would never release to the public, with the understanding it would be seen by ARIN staff only, or law enforcement if ARIN were to be so compelled. Would you want your internal network allocations to be made public, simply because I lodged a frivolous claim of fraudulent resource allocation against you? Would you want your network topology diagrams to be published to the world, just so that everyone could be satisfied that you really did need the address space in the areas you had requested, including your future expansion plans for the next two years? I'm sure your competitors would be very happy to see what markets you were planning to expand into ahead of time. No, we submitted that information to ARIN with the understanding that it was for ARIN staff eyes only, to evaluate our number resource needs now and in the near future--not to have it revealed to the world just so that someone could satisfy themselves that we had committed no wrong. Matt
_______________________________________________ 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.
