On Sep 5, 2012, at 3:32 PM, Gary Buhrmaster wrote:
My interpretation was what Randy implied, and that ARIN wants an agreement with everyone who gets a (presumably unique to the agreement) TAL to protect ARIN. That would seem like a lot of overhead to maintain to me (since as I recall a TAL may never, ever (ok, very rarely) change), but then appropriate risk management has always been an interesting thing to watch in the (potentially litigious) ARIN region.
I'll let Randy speak for Randy (only he could do such a fine job). I do agree with Chris (and many others) that this whole thing falls apart pretty quickly without a single root (e.g., think of the browser CA problem) -- for many reasons. I'd wager what ARIN is going to do in said "Relying Party Agreement" is tell RPs (i.e., *relying* parties) that they ought not rely to much on the data for routing, and if they do and something gets hosed, ARIN's not at fault -- but I'll wait to read the actual agreement before speculating more. -danny