On 30/07/2019 11:59, Chris Knipe wrote:

Then update your ARIN records to reflect that.  Fully agree with Dan on
this one.

Imagine ARIN did a take from RIPE NCC [Policy Proposal Idea?] and a
policy came into effect of validating ALL 'OrgAbuseEmail' objects listed
in the ARIN database. And revoked the resources from those that failed
to respond after multiple attempts.

Then imagine the media attention, public outcry, corporate lawyers from Amazon, the pressure from Congress, and an ARIN that would no longer function as an independent body anymore. . .

Scott - 

Alas, you have a fundamental misunderstanding about the nature of ARIN…  we don’t do anything other than implement policies that this community wants.  If the community developed a policy to require Abuse POC’s validation, and said policy made clear that failure to do so was to result in revocation, then ARIN would indeed implement the policy (and that includes revocation for those who ignored the policy.) 

This is actually exactly the way the US Government asked us to operate in 1997 - "Creation of ARIN will give the users of IP numbers (mostly Internet service providers, corporations and other large institutions) a voice in the policies by which they are managed and allocated within the North American region.”  <https://www.nsf.gov/news/news_summ.jsp?cntn_id=102819>.    Further, this support was reiterated by the USG recently in 2012 - "The American Registry for Internet Numbers (ARIN) is the RIR for Canada, many Caribbean and North Atlantic islands, and the United States. The USG participates in the development of and is supportive of the policies, processes, and procedures agreed upon by the Internet technical community through ARIN.”  <https://www.ntia.doc.gov/blog/2012/united-states-government-s-internet-protocol-numbering-principles>    

We’ve see the lawyer route as well, and I have zero doubt in both the enforceability of the ARIN registration services agreements and ARIN’s ability to operate the registry according to the community policy.