Subject: [Asrg] Abstract of proposed Internet Draft for Best Current Practice (please comment)

From: "Dr. Jeffrey Race" <[email-masked]>
Date: Wed, 05 Mar 2003 18:34:32 +0700

Interested parties are invited to provide comments to correct, elaborate 
or perfect my proposal, abstracted below, which I plan to offer as an 
Internet Draft momentarily. 

Comments or objections to the effect "This is going to be burdensome on
$spam_enabler" are superfluous because such is the precise intention of
the proposed Practice: to move the burden from victims to polluters and 
their enablers.

Unfortunately (travelling for some months as I am out here at the edge of 
civilization in Asia) I cannot figure out how to submit as an I-D for
BCP, since according to the new version of RFC2223, only an Area Director 
can submit, not an individual, for this track.  Please, will some
knowledgeable person tell me what to do?  I do not know who would be
the Area Director, and there is no appropriate Working Group. 

Thanks for all help.

Jeffrey Race
                               D_R_A_F_T 
      BEST CURRENT PRACTICE FOR DUTY OF CARE OF INTERNET RESOURCES
       Pre-release version 1.33    Draft date: March 5, 2003
           Drafted by Jeffrey Race   <jrace[at]attglobal.net>

            Current draft version (4,000 words) available at 
              <http://www.camblab.com/misc/univ_std.txt>

                  ABSTRACT (long form, not per RFC2223)

This document defines a Best Current Practice to minimize pollution of 
the Internet by various types of abuse, using the community's own 
measures in the absence of effective legal, regulatory and technical 
measures.

The Internet's design and management were predicated on voluntary 
cooperation, self-imposed good behavior, and the non-profit 
motivational structure of participants extant at its inception.  
Current experience of constantly rising pollution invalidates these 
formative assumptions and demands prompt and effective curative 
measures.   

Present anti-pollution measures fall under four generic headings: 
(1) self-directed good behavior; (2) legal sanctions  (3) passive 
ingress-control measures (principally filtering) and (4) active
egress-control measures (principally blocklisting) intended to 
modify the behavior of polluters and enablers.  The first three have 
definitively failed and will continue to fail for reasons specified in 
the document.  The fourth is generally completely effective in warding 
off ingress of pollution and frequently results in reforming abuse 
enablers, but it has two major shortcomings: limited uptake due to fear
of loss of competitive market position by early adopters, and sustained
transmission outages ("collateral damage").

In view of the failure of (1), (2) and (3) and the effectiveness despite 
shortcomings of (4), the document proposes to apply to the Internet the 
same rules society applies to all other resources to deter antisocial 
behavior viz. proper behavior requires clear published standards, 
standards entail accountability, accountability entails multiple modes
of enforceability, and enforceability entails traceability.  The 
document details procedures and implementing mechanisms of behavior 
modification, using the only proven effective method: withdrawal 
of internet resources of identity and connectivity.  Numerous tests have
shown this sanction to work equally well against both the wilful and the 
negligent to halt pollution immediately, where prior efforts at polite 
persuasion to follow best practice were ignored with impunity. 

The proposal thus innovates in three respects to halt Internet pollution:

 (1) It makes explicit that every custodian of internet resources is 
     responsible for preventing emission of pollution 

 (2) Adopting a simultaneous universal practice of withdrawal of 
      internet resources means that no provider will suffer competitive 
      disadvantage.  The Practice legitimates withdrawal of internet 
      resources as the only method proven effective in halting abuse.

 (3) The burden of pollution now falls on the polluter and his enabler 
      rather than on the victim, so conforming to the basic principle 
      used everywhere else in society to maintain justice and good order.

Well-managed, ethical members of the internet industry already conduct
their businesses, successfully and profitably, according to the 
principles specified in the Practice. The proposed Practice simply aims 
to raise the entire industry to the level of today's best players.

The Practice is intended to apply at every level of allocation, 
registration and usage of internet resources including but not limited 
to RIRs, LIRs, ISPs, webhosting firms, backbone connectivity providers,
domain name registrars, and end-users.   It defines internet resources,
unsolicited bulk electronic messaging, and abuse, and specifies 
procedures progressively to penalize abuse after a period of public 
admonishment.

In effect, the proposal implements the "user pays" paradigm in a 
completely new and clever way, without requiring any complicated
metering technology all proposals for which have failed on issues of
complexity, backward compatibility, absence of adequate hardware,
and the need for universal adoption to be effective at all.

The document embodies the only set of measures now on offer which will
quickly end the spam menace internationally sans new legislation, with 
but small and transitory disruption, by abandoning the discredited
"victim pays" model. Adoption will not only be cost-free for the Internet
as a whole but will substantially reduce the current economic burden of 
abuse. It does this by transferring the economic burden from abuse 
victims to the polluters and their enablers, which is fair and feasible,
and indeed the system used everywhere else in society.

As such the anticipated vigorous objections to adoption from some 
parties may be seen in advance as self-serving attempts to perpetuate
the discredited "victim pays" model by those now profiting from an 
Environmental Polluter business model or by their accessories and 
enablers.

Finally, RFCs and Practices are often considered by Courts in 
adjudicating the existence or extent of tortious conduct.  Therefore
looking to the longer term, adoption of this Practice may be expected 
to bring a welcome rule of law to the Internet.  

_______________________________________________
Asrg mailing list
[email-masked]
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/asrg